Show Notes

The Coach covers the basics of workout Program Design using principles taken from his book, The Abel Approach: Effort, Training Strategy, Workload Capacity, Recovery Capacity and Internal Hormonal and Biochemical Environment.

True expertise is in short supply today. Popularity doesn’t equate to expertise

• The Training Model is a tool used by professionals to illustrate where the building blocks for individual performance lie.
• There’s an art and science to Program Design. A collection of exercises does not make a workout; and a collection of workouts doesn’t make an effective program.
• Assessing the trainee and then designing a program for their needs is both art and science. If you aren’t assessing, you’re guessing.
• Program Design writing begins with the theme or purpose, then moves on to the structure, then the context, then whether or not (or how) to use planned performance training* or periodization. Then, from that point, he can determine the strategy and tactics, and finally, the elements of the program that will be variable or constant.
• Effort can be misapplied. An analogy for misapplied effort would be driving north when traveling from Canada to Florida, similar to using cardio as a warm-up for a weight-lifting workout.
• Training Strategy needs to be related to goals. “Strategy” and “Tactics” are not the same thing.
• Workload Capacity relates to how much work a trainee can benefit from, with no assessment of a client’s individual needs.
• Law of Least Eligibility: the less fit person receives the most adoptive stimulus; the most fit person receives the least adoptive stimulus.
• The SAID principle (Specific Adaptation to Imposed Demands) says that a trainee adapts to their training. So, doing fitness “bootcamp” classes conditions trainees to do bootcamp classes.
• Recovery Capacity is important, especially for the unconditioned trainee or the older trainee. Scott’s Hardgainer Solution (HGS) strongly considers recovery capacity and builds it into the program.
• Internal Hormonal and Biochemical Environment determines how a trainee will respond to training. Conditions a client might have, such as diabetes or age, factor into Program Design.
• The Hardgainer Solution uses the principles of Program Design to target a specific type of trainee: the person who trains hard but who is slow to see gains.
• A lack of knowledge of exercise physiology or the Training Model makes someone susceptible to falling for vogue exercise trends.

Show Notes

The Coach presents reams of research supporting the health benefits of a plant-based diet and shares his own adoption of a completely plant-based eating strategy.

Diet labels/memberships shouldn’t define who people are.

A diet is a lifestyle.

• Diets with labels are used to create tribalism with strict rules to follow.
• A diet lifestyle shouldn’t be a religion; nor should it define a person.
• Scott declares that he’s “Breaking Vegan,” meaning he’s eating a generally vegan diet, such as substituting black beans for chicken in one of his regular meals.
• His goal is not being lean or getting leaner–time will tell if he indeed does get leaner–but his goal with this recent switch is rather to be as healthy as possible.
• He’s NOT necessarily suggesting his clients switch to his eating strategy. What works for him is relative to his lifestyle, his goals, his body. He knows his clients have different goals, different lifestyles. The diet should fit the person, not the other way around!
• Public health organizations’ position papers support vegetarian diets as healthy, as well as vegan, adding that B12 supplementation is needed for vegan diets.
• Plant-based diets help reduce the risk of heart disease, stroke, certain forms of cancer, obesity, and diabetes, among other diseases.
• Scott’s not ruling out eating eggs, meat or fish on cheat days. For right now, he’s content to stay with plant-based.
• By coincidence, Scott’s mentee, fitness model Andy Sinclair, has also “gone vegan.”
• Vegetarian diets are also economical. Andy shared that his grocery bill has gone down; he buys chick peas for $.88 CAD.

[Reference]

Melina, V. “Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Vegetarian Diets.” J Acad Nutr Diet. 2016 Dec;116(12):1970-1980. doi: 10.1016/j.jand.2016.09.025.

Show Notes

The Coach shares a widely publicized recent study on weight gain, genotype patterns and insulin response that supports things he’s been preaching for years about calorie counting and nutrition. The research was published this year in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) by nutritionist experts, including renowned specialist Christopher Gardner.

“Stop counting calories. Stop the nonsense!”

• In the study, people who ate lots of vegetables and whole foods, rather than processed ones, lost weight without worrying about calories or portion size.
• People who cut back on processed foods but instead ate healthy whole foods and didn’t count calories, lost weight.
• Weight loss success in the study wasn’t linked to people’s genetics or insulin response to carbs.
• The study suggests that diet quality, not quantity, is what helps people lose weight.
• Low-fat brownies and low-carb chips are still brownies and chips. Calling them low-fat and low-carb is just “gaming the system.”
• Fitbit calorie tracking and “If It Fits Your Macros” calculators; genotype (DNA) patterns, blood type and hair analysis diets, are misleading consumers by subjecting them to obey numbers and non-relevant traits.
• Health authorities should shift away from focus on calories and instead emphasize avoidance of processed foods.
• “It’s time for US and other national policies to stop focusing on calories and calorie counting.” – Dariush Mozaffarian, MD, Dean of Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy at Tufts University.
• The study didn’t set caloric limits. The subjects were encouraged to eat only as much as they needed to avoid feeling hungry; they consumed fewer calories without counting calories and were simply unaware they were eating less [due to eating whole instead of processed foods.]
• “The unique thing is that we didn’t ever set a calories or macro unit number for them to follow.” – Christopher Gardner, PhD., Director of Nutrition Studies at the Stanford Prevention Research Center and a professor of medicine at Stanford University.
• Gardner said that the people who lost the most weight reported that the study had “changed their relationship with food.”
• Scott has long said, “[you] don’t have a problem with food and weight; you have a thinking and feeling problem about food and weight.”

[Reference]
Gardner, Christoper D., et al. “Effect of Low-Fat vs Low-Carbohydrate Diet on 12-Month Weight Loss in Overweight Adults and the Association With Genotype Pattern or Insulin Secretion.” JAMA. 2018;319(7):667-679. doi:10.1001/jama.2018.0245

Show Notes

So, what’s up with all that sugar in fruit? The Coach provides some facts to counter the hype and nonsense that fruit can make you fat.

“If it comes from a plant, eat it; if it was made in a plant, don’t”

• A few popular diets out there urge people to stop eating fruits because their natural sugars (fructose) are thought to contribute to weight gain. Research says otherwise: Fructose “additive” is the issue, fruit is not.
• Only fructose from added sugars appears to be associated with declining liver function, high blood pressure, and weight gain. Scott cites papers by Petta S, et al. and Madero M, et al.
• How could the fructose in sugar be bad, but the same fructose in fruit be harmless? Think about the difference between a sugar cube and a sugar beet. (Beets are the primary source of sugar in the United States)
• In nature, fructose comes prepackaged with the fiber, antioxidants, and phytonutrients, that appear to nullify adverse fructose effects. Eating fructose the way nature intended carries benefits rather than risks.
• Even eating a cup of blended berries with sugar added creates no additional spike in blood sugar (reference to study by Törrönen R, et al. cited). This may be because of the physiologic effects and nutrient composition of the fiber in fruit.
• Low-dose fructose may actually benefit blood sugar control. Eating a piece of fruit with each meal could be expected to lower -rather than raise- the blood sugar response.
• Research has shown/concluded that “the intake of fruit should not be restricted in patients with type 2 diabetes.”
• The research group who invented the glycemic index found that feeding subjects a fruit, -vegetable-, and nut-based diet had no adverse effects on weight, blood pressure, or triglycerides, and lowered LDL (“bad”) cholesterol by 38 points.
• Research shows that health and protection from disease have to do with eating less saturated fat, less trans-fat, less cholesterol, and where applicable, less nitrites and less sodium.
• Other benefits of eating fruit include improving the hunger-satiety feedback loop.
• Fitness cover model Andy Sinclair joins the show to share how fruit is a big component of his food intake.

[References]

Petta S, Marchesini G, Caracausi L, et al. “Industrial, not fruit fructose intake is associated with the severity of liver fibrosis in genotype 1 chronic hepatitis C patients.” J Hepatol. 2013;59 (6): 1169– 76.

Madero M, Arriaga JC, Jalal D, et al. “The effect of two energy-restricted diets, a low-fructose diet versus a moderate natural fructose diet, on weight loss and metabolic syndrome parameters: a randomized controlled trial.” Metab Clin Exp. 2011;60 (11): 1551– 9.

Törrönen R, Kolehmainen M, Sarkkinen E, Mykkänen H, Niskanen L. “Postprandial glucose, insulin, and free fatty acid responses to sucrose consumed with blackcurrants and lingonberries in healthy women.” Am J Clin Nutr. 2012;96  3): 527– 33.

Törrönen R, Kolehmainen M, Sarkkinen E, Poutanen K, Mykkänen H, Niskanen L. “Berries reduce postprandial insulin responses to wheat and rye breads in healthy women.” J Nutr. 2013;143 (4): 430– 6.\

Manzano S, Williamson G. “Polyphenols and phenolic acids from strawberry and apple decrease glucose uptake and transport by human intestinal Caco-2 cells.” Mol Nutr Food Res. 2010;54 12): 1773– 80.

Sievenpiper JL, Chiavaroli L, de Souza RJ, et al. “‘”Catalytic” doses of fructose may benefit glycemic control without harming cardiometabolic risk factors: a small meta-analysis of randomized controlled feeding trials.” Br J Nutr. 2012;108( 3): 418– 23.

Christensen AS, Viggers L, Hasselström K, Gregersen S. “Effect of fruit restriction on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes— a randomized trial.” Nutr J. 2013;12: 29.

Meyer BJ, van der Merwe M, du Plessis DG, de Bruin EJ, Meyer AC. “Some physiological effects of a mainly fruit diet in man.” S Afr Med J. 1971;45 (8): 191– 5.

Meyer BJ, de Bruin EJ, du Plessis DG, van der Merwe M, Meyer AC. “Some biochemical effects of a mainly fruit diet in man.” S Afr Med J. 1971;45 (10): 253– 61.

Jenkins DJ, Kendall CW, Popovich DG, et al. “Effect of a very-high-fiber vegetable, fruit, and nut diet on serum lipids and colonic function.” Metab Clin Exp. 2001;50 (4): 494– 503.