Paradox on gaining muscle and losing fat

[Guest guest]

Paradox on gaining muscle and losing fat

By Dr. Mel Siff

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Supertraining/

<<<Methods of body mass gain or loss based predominantly on calorie

counting may be misleading and simplistic. Virtually every program

aimed at anyone who wishes to gain or lose body mass, whether it be

fat or lean body tissue, is based on the law of conservation of

energy (i.e. Energy in = Energy out - in a closed system). Thus, one

will not lose weight if one ingests more calories than one expends.

Conversely, one will not gain weight if one burns more food than

one ingests. One remains in balance if one burns exactly the same

number of calories that one ingests. So, if you are overweight, then

all that you have to do is cut down on the number of calories you

eat and if you are underweight, then all you have to do is eat

more. Adding some exercise will assist in helping you burn

calories, so for losing weight (or, rather, excess body fat), a

combination of restricted calorie intake and regular exercise

(usually presumed to be 'aerobic' endurance activity) is even more

strongly recommended.

While this principle seems to be perfectly logical and seems to be

successful in many cases, we all know that there appears to be

something not quite correct about it, simply because we all know of

people for whom it does not work. Some really unfortunate obese

people become desperate because they have tried cutting their

calorific intake drastically, they have followed demanding exercise

programs, they have seen psychologists, and yet any minor losses

that they may have experienced are regained in no time at all. Nobody

seems to believe that they haven't been cheating on their weight

reduction programs, so off they go to have liposuction, but two

years later, poor souls are right back where they started. They

are informed that their problem is genetic, even though they were not

particularly overweight as children or teenagers. Maybe they hear

the monotonous tale that it is impossible to gain weight on less

than 1000 calories or less a day and they must be 'cheating'. Or

maybe their metabolic rate is too low and they need something

to 'speed it up'. Or they were 'deprived children' and

subconsciously their bodies have been making up for it by gaining

weight.

Maybe their metabolic rate is very low, but is it not possible that

their absorption of food is far more efficient than those who are

much thinner. Maybe their metabolic systems tend to convert more of

anything they eat to adipose tissue, while those of their thinner

cousins tend to be far less capable of storing excess food as fat,

because they genetically happen to be less capable of storing fat

for survival in times of food shortage. Thus, is this propensity to

store even the slightest excess of food in the form of energy-

concentrating fat a vestige of the evolutionary survival history of

humankind, in which food was not nearly as available as it is

today. In a similar vein, survival of humankind has to do with the

fertility of women and considerable research has indicated that

when a woman's body at level drops below a certain percentage of

body ass, she becomes amenorrheic and infertile. So, is the

tendency to store excess food in the form of fat a genetic memory

of a once-necessary survival mechanism or is it something more

sinister?

At the opposite end of the scale, there are some unfortunate folk

who struggle to gain weight, no matter how much they eat of

anything. Their calorific intake far exceeds their energy

expenditure, yet they never gain weight in the form of adipose

tissue or anything else. Certainly we need to rule out the

possibility of intestinal worms or other chronic disease, since

pathology may be the cause rather than mere physiology.

There is also another interesting category of people who

exhibit 'normal' bodyweight, have low body at and always look

excellent - they can eat anything in any quantities, yet they never

gain weight, nor do they do much exercise. Does the answer to the

riddle lie with this group?

All of this suggests that we re-examine the application of the Law

of Conservation of Energy to body ass equilibrium. Years of

scientific research has shown that this Law is correct, so there must

be something incorrect in the way in which it is being applied. It

is quite simple to deduce at least one flaw, namely that food is not

metabolized with 100% efficiency, so that some food will always go to

waste. Thus, excess food does not necessarily end up as adipose

tissue; it might simple end up in the sewers. In other words, we need

to rewrite that energy equation a little more thoroughly: Energy

in = (Energy for basal metabolism) + (Energy out as work) + (Energy

stored as fat) + (Energy lost as waste matter and heat). This means

that we need to focus on several other factors other than food

intake and exercise. We also need to comment on how well nutrients

are absorbed from the gut, how metabolic rate alters in response to

exercise or nutrition, and how all calories are not treated equally

in the body. Are members of the public being done a grave

disservice when their weight problems are discussed with them on

the basis of the highly simplistic from of the Conservation of

Energy law? >>>

[snippets by Kim Goss...Adam was not that one, as testing by

Poliquin's team of doctors discovered that a specific bacterium

called proteus mirabilis was affecting 's digestive system,

especially his ability to assimilate protein. Within three months he

gained 25 pounds of solid muscle and even decreased his body fat by

five percent. says his goal is to add another 15 pounds of

muscle before the Olympics.]

================

Comments?

Carruthers

Wakefield, UK