Could YOU be Shedding Fat Faster With This Scientifically-Proven Formula?

 Your Information is 100% Secure And Will NEVER Be Shared With Anyone

Metabolic Mindhack BONUS! Be NEAT

6 comments

What makes up the total number of calories you burn each day?

Well, there is your resting metabolic rate (some call it basal metabolic rate, and while they are technically different, the practical differences are small, so I tend to use them interchangeably). Then there is what is called the thermic effect of food (TEF), which is basically your body digesting and processing (storing and absorbing, or the opposite of that) of your food. Finally, there are your daily activities.

Now, on a percentage basis, according to the Mayo Clinic, your resting metabolic rate (RMR) makes up anywhere from 60 to 75% of you total calorie burn, the TEF another 10% (it’s a fairly stable percentage), and the rest comes from your activities (called the Thermic Effect of Physical Activity, or TEPA). This is the basic view of your total metabolic burn.

Pretty straightforward so far.

Now, here’s the trick (and the big “ah ha!” moment). Your activities can be divided into two broad categories:

Voluntary exercise-related activity thermogenisis and something called non-exercise activity thermogenisis, or NEAT.

NEAT was first coined by Dr. James Levine in 2004. He defined it as “the energy expended for everything we do that is not sleeping, eating or sports-like exercise.” [Levine J. Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (NEAT). Nutrition Reviews [serial online]. July 2, 2004;62(7):82-97.]

For all intents and purposes, NEAT is comprised of all of the other activity you do every day other than activities done specifically to exercise – walking to the bathroom, raking leaves, mowing the lawn… even typing, driving the car or holding the telephone to your ear.

As you can imagine, NEAT varies widely from person to person.

… it should be noted that, for the vast majority of dwellers in developed countries, exercise-related activity thermogenesis is negligible or zero. NEAT, even in avid exercisers, is the predominant component of activity thermogenesis… NEAT is therefore the most variable component of energy expenditure, both within and between subjects, ranging from ∼15% of total daily energy expenditure in very sedentary individuals to 50% or more of total daily energy expenditure in highly active individuals The enormous variety of components has made NEAT challenging to study and its role in human energy balance difficult to define. NEAT is therefore the most variable component of energy expenditure, both within and between subjects, ranging from ∼15% of total daily energy expenditure in very sedentary individuals to 50% or more of total daily energy expenditure in highly active individuals. [Levine J. Nonexercise activity thermogenensis (NEAT): Environment and Biology. American Journal Of Physiology: Endocrinology & Metabolism. May 2004;49(5):E675-E685]

Dr. Levine makes two interesting points here. The first is that most people in developed countries burn almost zero calories through exercise. I think that’s something we all know intuitively, but it’s interesting to see it spelled out.

Secondly, and most importantly, even in people who exercise a lot, the non-exercise activity likely makes up the majority of your daily calorie burn. That is HUGE!

Why, you ask?

Let’s be honest. Most of us, when we think about the “calories out” side of the energy balance equation, we primarily think of exercising. For a large percentage of you, the word “exercise” sends shivers down your spine. It may be the thought of getting sore (I’m guilty of this after a layoff), or the ever present “time” excuse that I have been harping on here and here.

With neat, you can increase your total calorie burn every day by doing more of what you were already doing! Going to the bathroom? Walk a longer route. Going to the mall? Park farther away from the door. On a conference call? Stand up, and maybe even pace a little (I use this one a lot).

The fact of the matter is there are literally hundreds of small ways that you can do a little more each day to increase the number of calories you’re burning, and time doesn’t even factor into the equation.

Which brings me to a question that seems to be completely out of left field (it’s not, believe me).

What did Winston Churchill know about NEAT?

Well, not a lot, actually. He did once describe the reason for his success in life as the economy of effort, “Never stand up when you can sit down, and never sit down when you can lie down.” While that may very well be the secret sauce for late (and great) Prime Minister’s success, it’s the opposite of what we want to do to increase NEAT and burn more fat every day. metabolic mindhacks tm neat Metabolic Mindhack BONUS! Be NEAT

This anecdote, however, did inspire me to come up with a set of easy to remember rules for successfully increasing NEAT.

So, reversing his logic and expanding upon it, here are some basic rules for increasing your NEAT:

  1. Don’t lie down if you can sit.
  2. Don’t sit down if you can stand.
  3. Don’t stand if you can walk.
  4. Don’t walk if you can run.

And, as my mom taught me, whether she meant to or not, when cleaning the house, turn the music up loud and dance!

Now I’d like to hear what you think. How can you increase your NEAT?
Hit me with your comments and questions below!

P.S. If you liked this post, please “like”, “tweet”, and “+1″ it.

Previous: Less is More, More is Better

 

Install this web app on your Android: Tap menu, more options, and then Add Shortcut To Homescreen.×

Posted In Fat Loss Economics, Metabolic Mindhack, Metabolic Mindset, Scarce Resources, Time, Weight Loss Economics

Metabolic Mindhack: Less is More, More is Better

7 comments

metabolic mindhacks tm walking Metabolic Mindhack: Less is More, More is Better Continuing from the last Metabolic Mindhack™, I want to continue removing the “time” barrier for shedding unwanted fat.

I know how hard it is to get an hour to exercise some days. Even when I block off time, sometimes things go haywire, and I can’t dedicate an uninterrupted hour. What if you can only find 30 minutes here and there? Or only 15 minutes? Maybe 10 minutes? It’s hard to find a good excuse to not have some time for exercise during the day. Especially if you are focusing on and prioritizing it.

The question I want to explore in this post is whether you can actually split up your exercise sessions to achieve the same, if not better, results.

In a 2007 study found in the Journal of Applied Physiology, they explored this question. The scientists set out to determine if fat metabolism was different if you did a single bout of “prolonged” exercise (in this case, 60-minutes), or two sessions of equivalent exercise – same total duration, same intensity (30-minutes x 2, with a 20 minute rest in between sessions). The test subjects exercised on a stationary bike at moderate intensity (60% maximal oxygen uptake).

In the first 30 minutes of both trials, growth hormone (linked to abdominal fat loss), and blood epinephrine and norepinephrine levels (linked to hormone sensitive lipase, an enzyme that controls fat burning by releasing fatty acids from fat cells) were significantly increased. So far so good.

In the repeated bout trial, there was a significant increase in free fatty acids circulating in the blood stream during the 20-minute rest.

In the final 30-minutes of exercise, free fatty acids and epinephrine were statistically higher in the repeated trial than the continuous bout. Also, blood glucose and insulin (higher insulin promotes fat storage) were significantly lower in the repeated trial.

Finally, the researchers found that fat oxidation was a larger contributor to total energy expenditure in the repeated trial that the continuous bout of exercise. Basically, they found that you burn more fat by splitting up your cardio routine [Goto K, Tanaka K, Ishii N, Mizuno A, Takamatsu K.Enhancement of Fat Metabolism by Repeated Bouts of Moderate Endurance Exercise. Journal of Applied Physiology, June 2007; 102:(6) 2158-2164.]

In 2011, another team led by Dr. Goto tested the effects of a continuous 30-minute bout of exercise versus 3 x 10-minute bouts with a 10-minute rest in between. Again, they found that the results “suggest that the repetition of 10-min of moderate exercise can contribute to greater exercise-induced fat oxidation compared with a single 30-min bout of continuous exercise.”

In both of these studies, there were (relatively) short rest periods followed by more exercise. What happens when you rest for hours at a time, and only exercise when convenient?

metabolic mindhacks tm 10 minutes Metabolic Mindhack: Less is More, More is Better The study that is most often cited is 1995 study found in the International Journal of Obesity Related Metabolic Disorders. In this landmark study, participants (56 obese, sedentary females) were asked to exercise 5 days per week, increasing duration from 20 minutes to 40 minutes over a 20-week period. One group did all of their exercise in a single session. The other group did their exercise in 10 minute increments, spread throughout the day.

The multiple-session group reported exercising on more days than their single-session counterparts (87.3 days versus 69.1 days on average). They also reported exercising more minutes per week – 223.8 minutes versus 188.2 minutes on average. That’s a difference of 35 minutes – basically an additional exercise session per week!

As you might imagine, the multiple-session group lost more weight (8.9 kilograms; 19.6 pounds) than the single session-group (6.4 kilograms; 14 pounds).

Now, in the first two studies I mentioned, we see that fat metabolism is greater for the multiple-bout approach, but there is a rest duration variable. In the last study, the rest variable is removed, but the weight loss is at least partially attributable to the increased amount of exercise performed.

If only there was a large review of the studies we could reference…

In 2009, a review was published in Sports Medicine. Here are what the authors found:

The majority of the intervention studies included in the review measured body mass, body composition or fat distribution before and after training. Although eight studies noted positive alterations in body composition following training, there is little consistency in the comparisons between the two exercise patterns. Four studies noted similar favourable alterations in body composition in both patterns, whereas three studies noted greater improvements following the accumulated exercise and one study reported greater improvement following the continuous approach [Murphy M, Blair S, Murtagh E. Accumulated versus Continuous Exercise for Health Benefit. Sports Medicine. January 2009;39(1):29-43.]

So, over the long term, it looks like the studies say (generally) that breaking the exercises down into smaller intervals of 10-minutes or greater is at least as good as doing a longer session for reducing body weight (yes, I know that mass and weight are different, but since we all live on the earth, the difference is more philosophical than practical).

Let’s also not forget what we learned about growth hormone, exercise and fat loss.

From a practical standpoint, especially for beginners, this is a great way to ease into an exercise program (this theory forms the foundation of the Metabolic Mayhem® beginners program).  For the rest of us, intermittent exercise also has many benefits, as we’ve discussed, and a variation on this theme is also found in the intermediate/advanced Metabolic Mayhem® course.

If you’re looking to shed pounds, “time” is no longer an excuse. As I mentioned in an earlier Metabolic Mindhack™, you can find 10 minutes just by using your DVR. Next time you think you want a snack at work, or you need a “break”, instead of checking email or reading TMZ, get up and walk for 10 or 15 minutes.

Get out and take a brisk walk for 10 minutes, 3 or 4 times per day. Your body will thank you for it in the long run.

Now I’d like to hear what you think. Do you agree? Disagree?
Hit me with your comments and questions below!

P.S. If you liked this post, please “like”, “tweet”, and “+1″ it.

Previous: Make it a Priority

Next: Bonus – Be N.E.A.T.

Install this web app on your Android: Tap menu, more options, and then Add Shortcut To Homescreen.×

Posted In Behavioral Economics, Fat Loss Economics, Metabolic Mindhack, Metabolic Mindset, Scarce Resources, Time, Weight Loss Economics

Metabolic Mindhack: Make it a Priority

6 comments

If I asked you whether or not shedding fat were a priority for you, I believe the vast majority of you would say it was. I also believe that if I asked you what was the most challenging thing about working out, a large portion of you would say that finding the time to exercise is a huge obstacle. Let’s talk about that for a minute.

I get it, because I’m a lot like you. I don’t hang out in the gym all day. I have a life. A busy life. Very busy, in fact (did I mention it was busy?) It hardly feels like I have time to breathe sometimes, with driving kids to school, sitting in traffic to go sit behind my desk or in a conference room, dinner time and play time and then bed time (for the kids).  You know what I mean, right?

So how do you find time to exercise? It took me a while to come up with a reasonable answer. And then I had my “ah ha!” moment. Here it is…

Let me turn that question on it’s ear for a minute… you know, pull a Dead Poet’s Society moment out of the air and look at things in a different way.

Let’s ask this question:

How do you find time to take your kids to school, soccer practice or swim lessons? How do you find time to sit in traffic? How do you find time to work 8 hours per day? How do you find time to watch TV for 2.7 hours every night?

It’s because you’ve made those things a priority in your life. You have allocated your scarce resource – time – to do these things. And in between all of these things are the hundreds of moments of procrastination that take place – getting sucked into twitter and Facebook. Spending 20 minutes chatting at the “water-cooler” as it were. Surfing the web.

metabolic mindhacks tm priority Metabolic Mindhack: Make it a Priority Me? Exercise is a priority. When I roll out of bed in the morning, I usually roll right into a 10 to 15 minute Morning Metabolic Motivator™ routine. Before I do anything else. That way, I start the day off with a feeling of accomplishment, and I know if something happens during the day and my schedule completely implodes on me (which we all know happens), I exercised.

But it doesn’t stop there. On my calendar, there are two times that are sacred, and they are some of the last to get rescheduled. I schedule time to workout every day. I block off one hour on my calendar. Some days I have time to make that a gym workout, other days I don’t, depending on how the day shapes up. On days I don’t, I get in some quality, fat-burning steady state cardio in the form of a 15-minute walk. I get out and clear my head, burn some calories and refresh myself.

And there is an hour blocked off at 9PM every night. That’s when my kids go to bed. If I didn’t get my full workout in during the day, I do it then. No excuses. If I did get it in, then I have the option of going for another walk, doing some Metabolic Intervals or doing a Metabolic Shred Circuit™.

Because I’m making exercise a priority, I’ve given myself options on what Metabolic Mayhem® routines to do and when.

Ultimately, though, the point is, I make time to exercise, and you can to. You just have to do it. But unless you make exercising a priority, unless working out becomes more important to you than, say, watching TV, you will always be saying “I don’t have time.”

Now I’d like to hear what you think. Do you agree? Disagree?
Hit me with your comments and questions below!

P.S. If you liked this post, please “like”, “tweet”, and “+1″ it.

Next: Less is More, More is Better

Previous: Make it Worth It

Install this web app on your Android: Tap menu, more options, and then Add Shortcut To Homescreen.×

Posted In Behavioral Economics, Fat Loss Economics, Metabolic Mindhack, Metabolic Mindset, Scarce Resources, Time, Weight Loss Economics

Metabolic Mindhack: Make it Worth It

3 comments

metabolic mindhacks tm financial incentives Metabolic Mindhack: Make it Worth It As an economist, I believe in incentives, both negative and positive. Some people respond better to one or the other, sure, but, in my opinion, you ultimately need both.

If you’re like me, your incentive for working is in some way related to the positive incentive of income. The flip side of that, is the negative incentive – if you don’t work, you might not be able to buy the things you want, or, in the worst case scenario, you might not be able to buy food to put on the table.

For a lot of people, myself included, getting in shape is as much about looking good laying on a Caribbean beach as it is about health. For the most part, I realize that health is an effect of eating healthy and exercising. But my incentive is more about looking better. [Yes, I know the opposite is also true - if your incentive is to be healthier, a consequence of getting healthier is that you will likely look better too].

When I run Tough Mudder races (I’ve finished 3, I have another scheduled in October), it’s about saying that I am a bad ass. I did something that a very large percentage of the population will likely never even try, much less do.

When I went to Yale after growing up in a small town in North Carolina, my motivation was to not embarrass myself of my family – there were a lot of “there’s no way he can make it at an Ivy League school” gossip back home (you gotta love those small towns!).

The point being, incentives come in all shapes and forms. Some are better motivators than others in certain situations. But I think you can boil most of them down to two large buckets: financial and pride. We want more money (or nicer things, or long therm security). And we want to be successful, whether that’s graduating form college, finishing 12-mile military style obstacle courses, or winning a friendly bet.

The question, though, as it pertains to this blog, is whether you can use incentives as a Metabolic Mindhack. What does the research say?

In a fairly recent study (June 2011), test subjects were put into a 24-week weight loss program, followed by an 8-week maintenance phase. They were given a weight loss goal per week. They were randomly divided into three groups. Group 1 – the control group – had a consultation with a dietician, and were subjected to monthly weigh-ins. Group 2 also had the dietician consult and monthly weigh-ins, but they were allowed to contribute up to $3 for each day they called in and reported that they had met or exceeded their goal. At the end of each month where they met their goals, they received all of their money back, plus a 1:1 match. So if they contributed $84 that month, they received $168 dollars back. However, if they failed to meet their goal, they forfeited their contribution (they lost their $84).

Group 2 was farther divided into 2 groups – the first group was told that there was an 8 week maintenance phase following the 24 week weight loss period. The second group wasn’t told about the maintenance phase (to test how incentives may affect not only weight loss, but maintenance as well).

After 32 weeks, there was no difference (statistically speaking) between the group 2 groups, and both groups lost more than group 1 by an average of 7 pounds (average weight loss for all of group 2 was 8.7 pounds versus only 1.17 pounds for the non-incentive result). [John L, Loewenstein G, Troxel A, Norton L, Fassbender J, Volpp K. Financial Incentives for Extended Weight Loss: A Randomized, Controlled Trial. JGIM: Journal Of General Internal Medicine [serial online]. June 2011;26(6):621-626.]

In another study, after 3 months, participants with no financial incentive lost 2 pounds, those in the $7 group lost approximately 3 pounds, and those in the $14 group lost 4.7 pounds. [Finkelstein E, Linnan L, Tate D, Birken B. A Pilot Study Testing the Effect of Different Levels of Financial Incentives on Weight Loss Among Overweight Employees. Journal Of Occupational & Environmental Medicine [serial online]. September 2007;49(9):981-989]

So, that takes care of financial incentives. What about incentives to be better than someone else? There’s a study for that…

Another June 2011 study divided folks into 2 groups. Each group attended a Healthy Lifestyle Workshop. The workshop provided some education on a balanced diet, weight loss techniques, exercise and behavior modification. They also received a worksheet where subjects listed personal goals and individual objectives.

One group was assigned to complete the weight loss trial as individuals. The second group was randomly divided into two teams, and asked to compete against each other for the greatest cumulative weight loss. They didn’t receive any incentive – financial or otherwise – to win the competition.

After three weeks, group A – the non-competition group – had lost 1.1% of their body weight on average. The group that had been placed in competition with one another? More than twice the weight loss, at 2.6% of total body weight on average. From competition alone. [Morton D, McElhone S, White H. The impact of weight loss competition in the workplace. Journal Of Human Nutrition & Dietetics [serial online]. June 2011;24(3):295-296].

Finally, what if there was no guaranteed incentive at all – only a chance to be incentive if you performed well enough. Was the mere possibility of a financial incentive enough to motivate folks? A 2008 study suggests that it is.  In this study, folks were divided into three groups, all with a targeted weight loss of 1 pound per week. There was a control group with no incentives, a group with deposit contracts with 1:1 matching (nearly identical constraints to the first study discussed above), or entered into a daily lottery with an expected value of $3 if the called in and reported a weigh in at or exceeding their goals. No payout was guaranteed.

The lottery worked this way:

Each lottery incentive participant chose a 2-digit number upon recruitment, eg, “27.” A 2-digit number was randomly generated every day. If the first digit generated was a “2” or the last digit was a“7” (which has approximately a 1 in 5 chance) and the participant met his/her daily weight loss goal, he/she would win $10. If the randomly drawn number was “27” (a 1 in 100 chance), the person would win $100.

In addition, for everyone in the incentive groups (deposit contracts and lottery), anyone losing 20 pounds or more at the end of 16-weeks received a $50 bonus.

So, how did the groups fare?

The lottery group lost and average of 13.1 pounds over 16 weeks. The deposit contract group lost an average of 14 pounds. And the control group? Only 3.9 pounds. Additionally, only 10.5% of the control group met the goal of losing 16 pounds. The lottery (52.6% met the goal) and deposit contract (47.4%) groups fared much better. [Volpp KG, John LK, Troxel AB, Norton L, Fassbender J, Loewenstein G. Financial incentive–based approaches for weight lossa randomized trial. JAMA. 2008;300(22):2631-2637.]

At the end of the day, incentives work. But how can you make them work for you?

Well, Metabolic Mayhem will have an incentive structure built in (more on this later). You can also start your own weight loss contest at work. I saw one recently that had a $10 “buy-in” and then the winner won all of the money… this could be the best of both worlds, competition and financial incentives. You can even enter a transformation contest (I’ll be holding one of those as well).

Now I’d like to hear what you think. Do you agree? Disagree?
Hit me with your comments and questions below!

P.S. If you liked this post, please “like”, “tweet”, and “+1″ it.

Next: Make It a Priority

Previous: Get a To-Go Box from the Get Go

Install this web app on your Android: Tap menu, more options, and then Add Shortcut To Homescreen.×

Posted In Behavioral Economics, Fat Loss Economics, Incentives, Metabolic Mindhack, Metabolic Mindset, Weight Loss Economics

Behavioral Economics, Bloomberg and Fat Loss

5 comments

I’ve long been interested in behavioral economics.

behavioral economics fat loss soda pop Behavioral Economics, Bloomberg and Fat Loss You see, in the larger field of economics, we assume that people are rational beings. You may be surprised to find out that we, as humans, are generally far from rational.

We may rationally know that overeating is bad for us, yet we do it anyway. Knowing that eating a Supersized Big Mac Value Meal will cost you almost half your daily calorie allotment is much different than actively deciding to eat a healthy meal instead.

Sure, you may rationalize that the value meal is more convenient and that you don’t have the time between work and driving the kids to soccer practice to cook a healthy meal. But rationalizing isn’t the same as acting rational.

Recently, New York City issued a ban on sugary drinks larger than 16 ounces. Without getting too  much into the politics of it all, let’s look at the proposal from a behavioral economics point of view. What this effectively does is force you to make a choice between scarce resources: time and energy.

Trent over at the The Simple Dollar blog sums it up nicely:

Let’s say you’re at a self-serve restaurant and you can get either a 16 ounce cup or a 32 ounce cup. If you take the larger cup, you only have to fill it once and take it to your table to consume 32 ounces of a sugary beverage. If you take the smaller cup, you can still consume 32 ounces easily, but halfway through you have to stop and make the active choice to get more soda.

 

The smaller cup becomes a natural limit, one that forces you to stop and think about your actions before you make another (potentially poor) choice.

 

Should the government be doing this? Probably not. Should you be using this kind of tactic in your own life? Most definitely.

Being human, just the other day I was craving my favorite fast food – a Wendy’s Baconator.

However, I was already home from work, and the kids were in bed, and I was pretty tired. If I wanted the Baconator, I would have to get up, go get in the car, drive 10 minutes to Wendy’s and 10 minutes home. As I thought about that, I also considered how hard I’d been working in the gym, and whether the disappointment of falling off the wagon (it wasn’t a cheat day) was worth it.

And it wasn’t it. It’s not that I made a rational choice to not stuff my face per se, it’s that the incentive to slam back a greasy sandwich wasn’t large enough for me to trade my scarce resources – time and energy – to go get it.

If the sandwich would have been sitting on the table in front of me, would my choice have been different (and irrational). Likely so. It would be easier to give in to the impulse and rationalize it later.

Of course, the decision to forgo a calorie laden meal was more of a passive decision for me – the food wasn’t readily available. In the New York example, they’re trying to force an active decision. Whether that should be the role of government is another discussion altogether (I’m clearly a big believer in personal responsibility, and I will leave it at that). I do agree with Trent above, however. You should definitely be seeking out opportunities to force yourself into more rational decisions.

Before I share my secrets on how to hack your brain to create a Metabolic Mindset™, I’d like to hear your thoughts and ideas… How can you use this type of trick actively in your life? How can you put a “natural limit” on your calorie intake, and slow down your irrational choices? I’ll share my tips in the next post…

What are your thoughts? How can you make it a little less convenient to eat garbage calories and a little more convenient to exercise?
Let me know in the comments below!

P.S. If you liked this post, please “like”, “tweet”, and “+1″ it.

Install this web app on your Android: Tap menu, more options, and then Add Shortcut To Homescreen.×

Posted In Behavioral Economics, Fat Loss Economics, Metabolic Mindhack, Metabolic Mindset, Scarce Resources, Weight Loss Economics