Cutting Diet Need some help [Archive] - John Stone Fitness Forums

Kryptonian

May 25th, 2007, 08:50 AM

This may interest you.

K
--------------------------------------------------------------------

The G-Flux Interview with Tom Venuto
Highlights From Part 1

A few weeks back, Tom Venuto, author of Burn the Fat, Feed The Muscle, caught wind of my May 5th and 6th Boston G-Flux seminar. And although he couldn't make it out to the event, he had a few questions for me.

Well, as usually is the case, a few questions lead to a few questions more. And we eventually ended up with a full-out, no-holds barred Q&A article covering everything from exercise volume to energy needs, to the value of calorie restriction.

In fact, when the smoke cleared, we ended up with the most comprehensive and in-depth G-Flux interview that's been published to date.

The entire full length interview is available to both Tom's Burn the Fat Inner Circle members and our Precision Nutrition customers.

So if you're not yet a customer, here's another reason to become one.

However, Tom and I believe the concept is so important and fundamental that we decided to edit the interview and publish the highlights for free for all of our newsletter subscribers and blog visitors.

Therefore you can read the highlights of this in-depth interview below.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Tom Venuto: John, Thank you for the interview. I’ve been following your work for years with interest, but the first time I heard you talk about “energy flux” or “G-flux”, it really got my attention and I said to myself, “He is right on the money with that one!” It fell right in line with my experiences as a bodybuilder and with what I’ve been teaching to my clients.

I have a program called Burn The Fat, Feed The Muscle, which suggests that it’s better to exercise more (burn) and eat more (feed) than to try to lose fat by eating less and exercising less. Are we talking about the same concept here essentially, and if so, what are some of the biggest benefits of this approach?

John Berardi: Well, first of all, it’s an honor to speak with you and to do this interview! I’m a huge fan of your work too!

Secondly, you’re right on track with the exercise more/eat more thing. In fact, that’s exactly what G-Flux is all about.

(Of course, we’re assuming here that the additional exercise is done properly and the additional food comes from the right sources and at the right times of the day.)

The amazing thing is that by increasing G-Flux, even in energy balance (where calories in theoretically equal calories out), people see increases in sympathetic nervous system activity and metabolic rate. And these increases lead to increased lean mass and decreased fat mass. Again, even in energy balance.

Now, this can get confusing so here’s an example.

Take an individual eating 2000kcal a day and burning 2000kcal a day. That person wouldn’t likely lose or gain any weight. They’re in energy balance and that means they’d be weight stable.

Yet if we use the principles of G-Flux to boost this person’s food intake to 3000kcal a day and boost their calorie burning to 3000kcal a day, most would assume that the person wouldn’t change. They’d assume that the increased intake and expenditure would cancel each other out, right.

But researchers have shown that in such a situation there are increases in metabolic rate, losses of fat, and increases in lean mass! The weight might not always change but body comp certainly does. And that’s the power of G-Flux! Eat more, exercise more, build a better body.

Tom Venuto: We’re not talking about simply eating larger and larger amounts of food at the same activity level and expecting our metabolism to continue increasing to match that, are we? I remember some gurus in the body building world who recommended that bodybuilders should eat outrageously large amount of calories based on this premise. One in particular back in the early 1990’s was suggesting up to 4,000 calories a day for women and upwards of 8,000 calories per day for men. That sounds like a prescription for fat gain to me.

With your model of G-flux, aren’t you referring to eating more at a higher, but manageable level, while also exercising more at the same time? This way, for fat loss we can still have a deficit, and for muscle gain we can still have a small surplus, but in both cases it would be at a higher level of energy expenditure?

John Berardi: You’re right, G-Flux is not about simply “eating more to boost metabolism”. Flux means flow and we’re talking about energy flow into and out of the body. So G-Flux covers both the intake and expenditure sides of the equation.

In essence, G-Flux is about exercising more so that you can eat more and all the while improve metabolism, lean mass and body fat %.
At this point, let’s get real practical. There are essentially 2 steps to increasing G-Flux:

Step 1 – Increase calorie expenditure through specific exercise strategies that include a mix of strength training, interval exercise, and low intensity exercise/cardio.

Step 2 – Increase calorie intake to
a) Match this energy expenditure if you want to maintain your weight yet improve your body comp

b) Fall just below energy expenditure if you want to lose weight while improving metabolism and lean mass

c) To exceed energy expenditure if you want to gain weight while improving body comp

G-Flux is pretty much that simple!

Tom Venuto: For fat loss, we know we need a calorie deficit, but you can have a deficit at a high energy intake or a deficit at a low energy intake. For example, you could have a 750 calorie deficit by consuming 1500 calories a day at an energy expenditure of 2250 calories per day. Or you could have a 750 calorie a day deficit at an intake of 3000 calories per day with an energy expenditure of 3750 calories per day. That’s a pretty big difference in activity and double the food intake. Will there be a difference in body composition results between these two regimens? And if so, how do you explain that two 750 calorie deficits have different effects in light of the laws of thermodynamics?

John Berardi: The whole goal of increasing G-Flux is boost total metabolic rate and, if fat loss is required, to allow you to eat more while still being in a negative energy balance.

Simply put, it allows you to diet at 3000kcal a day vs. 1500kcal a day (as per your example above). And personally, I MUCH prefer this!

You see, by allowing you to eat more while still being in a negative energy balance, the principles of G-Flux lead to the following benefits:
1) Increased total food intake when dieting, a powerful psychological benefit

2) Increased micronutrient and phytochemical intake, leading to better function and better health

3) Increased sympathetic nervous system activity, leading to a faster metabolism

4) Increased nutrient partitioning, leading to less fat and more muscle

Tom Venuto: G flux sounds to me like the antithesis of CRON or calorie restricted optimal nutrition, which some people practice believing it will extend lifespan. In your discussions of G-flux, does this subject of life extension through calorie restriction ever come up from your readers or audiences and what is your response or criticism?

John Berardi: Oh yeah, I hear this ALL THE TIME.

Some believe that calorie restriction is the only way to enhance lifespan in humans. And to them it seems that the opposite – high levels of G-Flux – will shorten lifespan. Sure, this at first sounds logical. Yet as my grad school buddies always said, just because it’s logical doesn’t make it physiological.

Yes, many animal models have demonstrated that reducing calorie intake by 30-50% can dramatically increase lifespan. But before dropping your calorie intake by 30-50%, consider the following.
First, there are a lot of questions left unanswered. Just a few, for example, are:

Do all these animal studies translate to humans?

Are there other ways to live longer vs. eating 30-50% less?

How exactly does calorie restriction work and can we mimic that other ways?

Are there any risks associated with eating this much less?

These are big questions that shouldn’t be dismissed!

Second, the current comparisons between a “typical” diet for animals and a calorie restricted one aren’t fair comparisons. After all, typical rat chow or monkey chow isn’t exactly healthy. It’s not even real food. Rats, for example, are fed chow pellets – in essence, processed, fast food! So they’re not eating all that healthy in the first place.

What if they were actually fed a healthy higher calorie diet vs. a healthy lower calorie diet? What if they ate the equivalent of 5-10 servings of fruits and veggies a day? What if they exercised regularly? What if they supplemented with fish oil? What if they maintained low body fat? And so on…

I speculate that if these animals were given the chance to follow a healthy diet and a high level of G-Flux, the effects of calorie restriction wouldn’t seem all that impressive.

Translated to humans, here’s what I think. If you’re going to keep up your typical North American, low quality, high sugar, processed diet while refusing to exercise, then yes, calorie restriction might help you live longer. But that’s a choice that no one has to make.

In the end, eating well, supplementing intelligently, and subscribing to a life-long exercise program may prove to be more powerful than calorie restriction. And you won’t have to suffer the psychological perils (restriction, deprivation) or physical perils (below) associated with this approach. That’s right; there are some health problems associated with calorie restriction.

Mike Linksvayer, the example of a calorie restriction proponent detailed in a recent New York Times article, stands 6ft tall and 135 lbs. Mike is severly underweight. Now, that might be better than being overweight. Yet this low body weight presents its own risks as he ages.

Studies show that those with low body weight and low muscle mass are at a higher risk for a loss of independence into their elder years. This is due to the natural losses in bone and muscle that occur with age. So Mike may be healthier than his friends now, but watch out Mike as you age!

And here’s another interesting piece of data…studies are showing that the nutritional supplement resveratrol may work through the same pathways as calorie restriction to enhance longetivty. No calorie restriction required.

So, in the end, don’t stop eating just yet. Although calorie restriction works in animals, it’s not yet proven in humans. And if it does turn out to work, who cares? Calorie restriction is so difficult and carries its own risks including exchanging quality of life for longevity.

Why not learn the good lifestyle habits associated with smart eating, proper supplementation, and lifelong exercise? That way you can eat, exercise, and be merry while living long and living well.