Why Your "Gut" Could Be Key To Losing Extra Fat

Who knew?

Recent research suggests your "gut" could play a role in helping you lose that stubborn belly fat.

(Ironic, I know!)

How's this possible? Well, it's all thanks to the "inner ecosystem" that lives in your body.

We've known about the "good" and "bad" bacteria that can thrive in our digestive systems. But here's what we didn't know...

"Good bacteria," also known as probiotics, can help burn off abdominal fat. This is as close to "spot reducing" as you can get!

The study, published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, studied the effects of probiotics on 87 overweight participants.1

One group drank 200 grams of milk with a probiotic supplement.

The second group drank 200 grams of milk with nothing else.

This was done daily, over the course of 12 weeks.

The results?

The milk-with-probiotics group lost nearly five percent of their abdominal fat!

But it doesn't stop there... they also lost over three percent of their subcutaneous fat (the fat that's just underneath the skin).

The control group that did not supplement with probiotics had no significant change in bodyweight or fat loss.

Pretty amazing, right!?

This supports another very recent study that suggests probiotics can be helpful in fighting obesity overall.

Researchers from Lund University in Sweden explored the effects of lactic acid bacteria on rats given a high-calorie diet.2

One group of rats were given the lactic acid bacterium from the uterus and into adulthood.

The second group did not receive the bacterium.

Both groups ate the SAME amount of food.

Those that got the bacterium weighed significantly less than those that didn't.

So how can you get some "good" fat-fighting bacteria into YOUR gut?

Here are a few tips:

1. Stay away from sugar and fructose. Sugar serves as fuel for the growth of bad baceteria, yeast and fungi. All the kinds of wrong things you DON'T want growing inside you.

2. Eat more fermented foods. Anything pickled is a good bet, like cabbage or cucumbers.

3. Natto. This is a popular Japanese dish. It's fermented soy beans and it's rich in "good" bacteria.

4. Probiotic supplement. This is another option if you don't like eating fermented foods. You can easily find this at your local health food store.

And by the way ... if you're serious about taking your health and fitness to the next level, why not take advantage of your FREE Fitness Consultation? (an $87 value)

During this consult, you'll receive detailed information on how to get fit and trim that's tailored to YOUR body.

There's no obligation and it's totally and completely free. To sign up, click here

 

References:

1. Kadooka Y, Sato M, Imaizumi K, Ogawa A, Ikuyama K, Akai Y, Okano M, Kagoshima M, Tsuchida T., "Regulation of abdominal adiposity by probiotics (Lactobacillus gasseri SBT2055) in adults with obese tendencies in a randomized controlled trial".Eur J Clin Nutr. 2010 Jun;64(6):636-43. Epub 2010 Mar 10.

2. Karlsson CL, Molin G, Fåk F, Johansson Hagslätt ML, Jakesevic M, Håkansson A, Jeppsson B, Weström B, Ahrné S."Effects on weight gain and gut microbiota in rats given bacterial supplements and a high-energy-dense diet from fetal life through to 6 months of age."Br J Nutr. 2011 Mar 30:1-9.

I’ve recently heard about a new concept (at least it’s new to me!) called Nutritional Cleansing. Now I am a BIG SCEPTIC when it comes to new stuff in the fitness industry. There are so many trashy fads and scams out there just wanting to take your money and sell you a dead-end promise. When I heard about nutritional cleansing I rolled my eyes and figured it was just another one of these scams to trick people into spending money and then leaving them to fail again. I decided to look into it so if my clients came asking me about it I would know what it was.

Nutritional cleansing is basically achieved by using super-nutritious food made up from nutrient rich plants and substances from all over the world. It’s the cutting edge of food technology I suppose you could say. The idea is that the body is laden with lots of toxins, and these toxins are stored mainly in the fat cells. I know that this is true – toxins are stored in our fat cells in order to keep them out of our circulation, so they can’t do as much damage to us. What I didn’t realise at the time I was looking into this is just how toxic we actually are. While I was listening to some of the information available to me about this nutritional cleansing, I heard that the breast milk and cord blood of the Inuit people (these are people who live far away from cities and modern life, who still hunt and gather their food) was so far off the chart for toxic contamination, especially of mercury and PCBs that is could be classified as industrial waste! That scared the living daylights out of me. I investigated that claim (coz I never just believe anything I hear or read in just one place) and it’s true. Toxins are a very real part of everyone’s daily life, and we consume and absorb far more of them than we care to think about.

What nutritional cleansing achieves is helping the body to remove these toxins, as well as providing it with super-nutrition so it can repair damaged cells and DNA, boosting circulation, immune system function, thyroid function and liver function. When the body receives all of this nutrition is can release the toxins, remove the toxins, and this allows it to release excess body fat. Releasing excess body fat was really interesting to me, because I know that some of my clients have had lots of trouble releasing excess body fat even when they are exercising and eating the way I recommend. It is also really hard to lose fat when you get down to the last 5kgs or so. It makes a lot of sense to me that the body is reluctant to release fat if it is using that fat to buffer a large toxic load.

The food technology and science behind these products also helps to repair and boost metabolism. Many people’s metabolisms are essentially broken – through yo-yo dieting, improper eating, poor nutrition, being overweight, lack of exercise and ever too much exercise. After having a look at all of this information I decided to try some of the products that facilitate this nutritional cleansing process. WOW!

I did not know how bad I actually felt until I felt how good I could feel! I started sleeping really well and actually waking up refreshed in the morning – with less total hours of sleep. I didn’t really have any excess body fat to lose but I reduced bloating quite a bit and my muscles became more defined. Cellulite reduced. My energy levels were out of this world, and I live a pretty stressful life most of the time! I could cope with all the exercise I do as part of my job, and even started doing my own training again! I maintained my muscle mass and didn’t put on any fat, which I would usually do with all that chronic cardio and stress in my daily life.

I’m sold on this concept. I do not go a day without using the products and they have actually saved me money at the supermarket because they are food, not just supplements. I was very sceptical, but I’ve had to eat my words because there will never be a day of my life from now on that I do not use the products. I can’t go back to feeling the way I used to feel now I have experienced feeling so fantastic. That might sounds cheesy and unrealistic but the effect they had on my life was that dramatic, and I thought I was a very healthy person with a really healthy diet before I started.
So no, I don’t think nutritional cleansing is a scam. I think you’d be crazy not to investigate it further, because I don’t think there is a single person in the world who doesn’t want to lose fat and feel better than they ever have in their entire life.
Want to see more? Visit this link to see a video that explain the whole nutritional cleansing concept: www.desirefitness.isagenix.com

This is the August 2010 Newsletter, enjoy!

Hi guys and welcome to a very cheery, Spring-is-in-the-air August (yes, the random rain is all a part of it!). I thought this month would be a good opportunity to talk about something that is an issue for pretty much all of us, and that is excess body fat. Even if you are one of the minority of people who have ‘skinny’ genes, you might still have excess body fat. This is the kind of fat you might have heard of as ‘skinny fat’. If you are one of the majority who doesn’t look quite so skinny you just plain out have too much of it!

We all know this, we all struggle with this. But WHY is it such a struggle?
I am here to tell you this month that having excess body fat is NOT your fault. BUT it IS your responsibility. There are so many factors in our lives that conspire to keep the kgs piling up on our tummies and thighs; it just is not your fault. But just because something is not your fault doesn’t mean you don’t need to take responsibility for it, after all, it is your body and you have to live in it!

So WHY do we have this excess body fat?
First of all there’s what and how we eat. This is a huge topic and we will talk more about it in future articles and e-mails, but the basics are:

• We have an unlimited supply of low-nutrition food, made up of cheap, bad quality, high carbohydrate ingredients.
• Our consumption of carbohydrate-rich foods has skyrocketed in the past 30 years, and we are now suffering badly for it.
• We have become carbohydrate-addicts, yip, quite literally our bodies are addicted to carbohydrates.
• We have been encouraged to have a negative relationship with our food based on guilt, not a positive one based on all the great things that food does for us.
• We have been given conflicting, confusing and down-right WRONG information about the sort of food we should eat and how we should eat it.

Second - we have all been made to feel terrible about ourselves when we try and fail to lose weight. I’m sure you have heard “it’s calories in, calories out” “you just have to eat less and do more” “you just need more willpower” “It’s not hard to lose weight, it’s simple”.

THAT IS TOTAL ABSOLUTE RUBBISH!
I am not going to lie to you, losing excess body fat can be a tough job and it requires commitment, time and dedication. But if you have a programme to do it right and banish the excess kgs forever, it will be a hell of a lot easier and actually quite enjoyable. It definitely is not as simple as calories-in-calories-out. So many trainers, dieticians, doctors, your mum, your teacher… will tell you that and make you feel bad for not managing to achieve this ‘simple’ thing. It’s not about calories at all! Don’t count calories! We have been told so much wrong information is can be easier just to shut off and live with the body that you have at the moment.

Third - lots of us have jobs that require us to spend a large amount of time during the day sitting. This is bad for our bodies as well as bad for our waistlines. Sometimes these inside, desk-bound jobs leave us so tired out and stressed we don’t feel like we have the time to exercise. Unfortunately this is a bit of a catch-22 situation, taking the time and effort to exercise and eat better will make you feel 100s of times better than you do right now, but you need to find the energy to take the first step!

I want you to ask yourself this: ARE YOU HAPPY WITH THE WAY YOUR BODY LOOKS RIGHT NOW?

If the answer is no, then you are cheating yourself out of what you really deserve if you give up on your goal of losing the excess fat. You CAN get the body you deserve, and that you were born to have. You CAN achieve fat-loss that will get you the body that you want and keep that body for you for the rest of your life.

I want all of us reading this email to make a commitment to ourselves and to our families to make a stand and claim our bodies back from the excess fat and the lifestyle that got us to this point. Fat is NOT your fault, but it IS your responsibility.

Low Carbohydrate Nutrition – the World is Not Flat

Introduction
Once upon a time everyone knew that the world was flat. After we discovered that this was incorrect, everyone still knew that the sun and other planets orbited the earth. Well, er, no, actually, we were wrong.

Science is fantastic, but we always gain new information. Perhaps it is now time to question whether our fast-held beliefs in ‘correct’ nutrition are actually correct. There is growing acceptance in the wider public that low-carbohydrate diets promote weight-loss. This phenomenon is dismissed by many in the academic area as being pop-cultural nonsense... “it’s all about energy in versus energy out”, they cry. But can low-carbohydrate diets be dismissed so lightly?

That ‘a calorie is a calorie’ was once thought of as a universal truth. Several researchers (Volek, et al., 2004; Manninen, 2006) challenge this assumption and now present compelling research to the contrary. It may now be time to accept that ‘a calorie is not just a calorie.’

This controversy is the subject of this essay. It will examine some of the growing literature researching low-carbohydrate diets and their effects on the human body. It will address the science behind low-carbohydrate diets and why they appear to actually work so well. It will examine the message being given to the public and question the validity of this.

Ultimately the objective of this essay is to present the scientific other side of the story about low carbohydrate nutrition choices.

Definitions

This essay will define diets that are between 50g-150g/day of carbohydrate as ‘low carbohydrate diets’ (LCD). Diets that include carbohydrate above 50g/day do not usually cause measureable ketone bodies to be present in urine (Westman, et al., 2007). This essay will define diets that are below 50g/day of carbohydrate as ‘low carbohydrate ketogenic diets’ (LCKD). These definitions are taken from the review article by Westman et al (2007).

Literature Review

In the current (September 2009) issue of North and South magazine, there is an article about fat people (Wayne, 2009). This article, while not from any scientific journal, interviews scientists undertaking cutting-edge research about gene expression and the role this plays on adiposity. This article is not specifically about low carbohydrate diets, but it does present to a very receptive public the view that optimal nutrition and nutritional choices are not as cut and dried as they have been led to believe.

There is a large body of research pertaining to low carbohydrate diets and nutrition.
Westman et al (2007) prepared a review article examining research on LCD and LCKD from 2002 through to 2006. They found that LCDs improve glycemic control and insulin resistance in both healthy people and people with type 2 diabetes. When no set calorie intake is specified, a reduction in carbohydrate results in a voluntary and spontaneous reduction in total calories consumed. In controlled trials for weight loss they found that LCD diets achieves weight loss, and improves the blood lipid profile of participants. They question if dietary carbohydrate is actually an essential nutrient, and if dietary fat actually causes heart disease. Similar finding are reported from Volek et al (2004), in the discussion portion of their research paper.

Mozaffarian et al (2004) researched the effect of dietary fat, carbohydrate and the progression of atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women. They only investigated postmenopausal women (235 subjects) with established coronary heart disease, so their findings cannot be applied to other populations. However they found some surprising results. They found that dietary intake of saturated fat actually slowed the progression of atherosclerosis. They also found that when carbohydrate intake increased (with a corresponding decrease in saturated and monounsaturated fat) the rate of progression of atherosclerosis increased. This study found that when total fat, especially monounsaturated and saturated fats, were lowered in the diet (usually replaced with more carbohydrates), risk factors for CHD increased in these women.
Volek et al (2004) compared the effects of LCKD and low fat (LF) diets for weight loss. The LCKD had a percentage ratio of carbs:fat:protein of 9:63:28, and the LF diet 58:22:20. This makes it a very low carbohydrate diet compared with some other studies (Westman, et al., 2007). They found that reductions in body mass, fat mass and trunk fat mass in the LCKD group was significantly greater than in the LF diet for the male subjects, and slightly greater for female subjects.

Questions have been raised about the ability of LCKDs to preserve lean muscle mass during dieting. Manninen (2006) provides a commentary on this issue. In the studies he reviewed, he found that contrary to the idea that muscle mass is lost during LCKDs, muscle mass is in fact preserved. Greater weight is lost through fat, and in some cases lean muscle mass was gained.

Another interesting study by Jonsson et al (2009) compared the effects of a ‘paleolithic’ (paleo) diet and a diabetic diet. The paleo diet is based on meat, fish, vegetables, fruits, eggs and nuts. It excludes grains, legumes, salt, sugar, refined fats and dairy. The diabetic diet was designed in line with current dietary guidelines for diabetics. The average daily intake of carbohydrate from the paleo diet was 125g compared with 196g in the diabetic diet. The intake of food was not restricted in either diet; however those following the paleo diet consumed less calories. The findings of this study were that the paleo diet caused blood lipid profiles to improve, diastolic BP decreased and weight and waist circumference decreased compared to the diabetes diet. Glucose and insulin levels declined during the paleo diet. While this study is not strictly a comparison of low carbohydrate diets, it does illustrate that more favourable outcomes can be achieved when using ‘non-conventional’ nutrition ideas than when using conventional guidelines.
These studies demonstrate that there is strong evidence that low-carbohydrate diets can provide benefits to many people in our societies. Those who may specifically benefit from their use are diabetics, those with CHD risk-factors, those with insulin resistance and the obese and overweight (Westman, et al., 2007). While LCKD are not appropriate for long-term use, they appear to work extremely well for rapid weight-loss (especially fat loss) and improvement of blood lipid profiles (Westman, et al., 2007; Volek, et al., 2004; Manninen, 2006).

Further research is required around the issue of more life-style based LCDs, such as the paleo diet investigated by Jonsson et al (2009). This research is most interesting in that it compared a grain-free diet to a conventional diabetic diet. It would be interesting to see if the more sustainable intake of 125g/day of carbohydrate in combination with a grain-free diet works in the long-term to prevent lifestyle related disease.
It is clear that low-carbohydrate diets should not be dismissed out of hand by those working with people to improve their lifestyles through nutrition.

Why Low Carbohydrate Diets Work

This section will examine the likely mechanisms through which LCDs work in the body.
The exact science of how LCDs and LCKDs work is still somewhat controversial in the literature.

There appears to be an effect of spontaneous reduction of energy intake when people switch to LCDs. This effect is most notable in LCKD. It has been shown that an increase in ketone levels inhibits appetite (Volek, et al., 2004). Protein is also usually increased in LCKDs, and protein is known to reduce appetite when consumed in meals (Westman, et al., 2007). The presence of ketone bodies also appears to assist in preventing the breakdown of muscle tissue (Manninen, 2006).

The preservation of muscle mass seen in the studies (Westman, et al., 2007; Manninen, 2006) also suggests that LCDs are superior to low-fat diets in maintaining lean body tissue. The mechanisms for this are suggested to be the presence of ketone bodies (as mentioned above), increased growth hormone production and increased dietary protein intake. Growth hormone production increases when low blood sugar levels are present (Manninen, 2006) although studies have not confirmed that growth hormone levels always rise when LCDs are used (Manninen, 2006). The availability of increased amounts of dietary protein as almost always found in LCDs may increase the synthesis of protein by the increase of systemic amino acid availability.

Protein intakes on LCDs and especially in LCKDs tend to be higher than in conventional diets. It has been previously thought that only minimum dietary protein is needed in order to fulfil protein requirements, and any excess is simply wasteful (Layman, 2009). Protein has been considered an expensive and wasteful nutrient source. However this perception are based on animal feeding protocols, whereby all nutrients are calculated on a cost/benefits analysis, wanting maximum growth for minimum price, regardless of the long-term benefits of greater quantities of protein (Layman, 2009). Current dietary guidelines are based on minimums, not on optimal protein levels. New studies are being undertaken that look at dietary protein and the role it plays in amino acid metabolism, thermogensis and gylcemic control, rather than just looking at nitrogen balance (Layman, 2009).

LCDs tend to also be low GI, thus acting to prevent inconsistencies in blood glucose. This effect can prevent hypoglycaemia from occurring, assisting with appetite regulation (Volek, et al., 2004).

LCDs have a greater percentage of their calories coming from protein and fat (Westman, et al., 2007). The advantages of LCDs over low-fat diets may come from the greater thermogenic effect of protein, the ability to excrete some excess energy as ketones via sweat, urine and defecation, and the demand of protein turnover for gluconeogenesis.

Studies are required that look at LCDs and LCKDs from carefully controlled feeding and metabolic studies, with large numbers of subjects, encompassing comprehensive physiological measurements to identify the mechanisms behind the effects that LCDs have on the body (Volek, et al., 2004).

Awareness and Campaigns

There is much public awareness of lifestyle diseases, and some rather confused public awareness about LCDs. However the public awareness of LCDs mostly comes from magazines written by journalists who are not scientists. The public appears to be receptive to LCDs, most likely because they actually work, and work better than traditional low fat diets.

There are many official organisations that promote health to the public, such as the National Heart Foundation and Diabetes New Zealand. However these organisations do not generally promote LCDs as good options, and are firmly on the ‘fat is bad, saturated fat causes heart disease etc etc’ bandwagon (National Heart Foundation, 2009; Diabetes NZ, 2008). The assumptions around carbohydrates, fats and protein must be addressed, because nutritional science does not have a conclusive answer to the questions now being raised about the role of carbohydrates, fat and protein in the diet. These organisations lead the public to believe that nutritional science is set in stone and that they must eat according to the official recommendations or else face crippling lifestyle diseases.

While these organisations are surely operating on good faith, they are unfortunately operating on simplistic and outdated science, as demonstrated above in this essay.

Conclusion

It can be safely said that LCDs and LCKDs work very well in the capacity of improving blood lipid profiles, increasing insulin sensitivity and weight-loss whilst preserving lean muscle mass (Manninen, 2006; Jonsson, et al., 2009; Westman, et al., 2007; Volek, et al., 2004). LCKDs are not viable as lifestyle diets due to the very low carbohydrate requirement, which excludes almost all fruit and vegetables. As a short-term treatment for the above mentioned conditions they seem to have a place and could very well be recommended.

LCDs in the ranges of 100-150g/day of carbohydrate seem viable as long-term lifestyle options; however research on their long-term viability is lacking (Jonsson, et al., 2009).
There is much more to optimal nutrition than most people have been led to believe. Science is not conclusive on several important matters, especially on the role of carbohydrate and its contribution to current lifestyle disease (Westman, et al., 2007). It is time for the academic world to accept that science is a process that does not have an end. New information is constantly being discovered that challenges commonly-held belief systems.

Just as we now know that the world is not flat, we are now beginning to understand that we have only just begun to scrape the surface of nutritional science. Perhaps it is now time to examine our love-affair with carbohydrates in light of our rapidly declining health, and question if eating they way we are told is really good for us.


Bibliography
Diabetes NZ. (2008). Food and Nutrition. Retrieved September 8, 2009, from Diabetes NZ: http://www.diabetes.org.nz/food_and_nutrition

Jonsson, T., Granfeldt, Y., Ahren, B., Branell, U.-C., Palsson, G., Hansson, A., et al. (2009). Beneficial effects of a paleolithic diet on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabete: A randomized cross-over pilot study. Cardiovascular Diabetology, 8(35). doi: 10.1186/1475-2840-8-35

Layman, D. (2009). Dietary Guidelines should reflect new understandings about adult. Nutrition and Metabolism , 6(12). doi:10.1186/1743-7075-6-12

Manninen, A. (2006). Very-low-carbohydrate diets and presevation of muscle mass. Nutrition and Metabolism , 3(9). doi: 10.1186/1743-7075-3-9

Mozaffarian, D., Rimm, E., & Herrington, D. (2004). Dietary fats, carbohydrate, and progression of coronary atherosclerosis in postmenopausal women. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition , 80, 1175-1184.

National Heart Foundation. (n.d.). National Heart Foundation. Retrieved September 8, 2009, from Eating and Nutrition: http://www.nhf.org.nz/index.asp?pageID=2145828145

Volek, J., Sharman, M., Gomez, A. J., Rubin, M., Watson, G., Sokmen, B., et al. (2004). Comparison of energy-restricted very low-carbohydrate and low-fat diets on weight loss and body composition in overweight men and women. Nutrition and Metabolism , 1(13). doi 10.1186/1743-7075-1-13

Wayne, J. (2009, September). The article every skinny person should read. North and South , pp. 31-37.

Westman, E., Feinman, R., Mavropoulos, J., Vernon, M., Volek, J., Wortman, J., et al. (2007). Low-carbohydrate nutrition and metabolism. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition , 86, 276-284.

© Samantha Gentry, 2009, all rights reserved, article cannot be distributed or used without written permission.