In case you were holding out hope that the Wall Street Journal was authored by journalists who had a clue, I offer you this: New Ways Calories Can Add Up to Weight Gain.

I hope you were reading carefully because if you weren't, the author of the piece might have you believing his foolishness:

The findings suggest that it matters little whether a diet is high or low in fat, carbohydrates or protein, it's calories that build body fat.

You don't even have to hunt down the full text of the study being referenced to see that this is the wrong conclusion. Simply read to the end of the article and you will find this:

Carbohydrates were held steady at about 41% to 42% of calories while fat levels varied with the protein regimen.

What this means is that overeating by 1,000 calories a day while getting more than 40% of total calories from carbohydrates will cause you to gain fat no matter what your protein to fat ratios are.

Taking it a step further, we can read the full text to get the precise nutrient breakdown:

Low Protein Diet Daily Averages

6% protein (47g), 52% fat (181g), 42% carb (329g)

Normal Protein Diet Daily Averages

15% protein (139g), 44% fat (181g), 41% carb (380g)

High Protein Diet Daily Averages

26% protein (228g), 33% fat (129g), 41% carb (360g)

I hope they all liked carbs going into the study because that is a LOT of carbs.

The point I'm trying to make in all of this rambling is that you must not let a journalist or someone with a fancy title in front of their name tell you what to think. Every time you go to a site such as Yahoo! Health, open the newspaper to the health section, or turn the TV channel to The Dr. Oz Show, it is imperative that you seek out the actual data and draw your own conclusions. Otherwise, you risk becoming another sheep in the herd; a fat and sickly sheep at that.

The results suggest that substituting polyunsaturated FAs with saturated or monounsaturated FAs may reduce pancreatic cancer risk, independently of total energy intake, particularly among obese subjects.

If that wasn't clear enough, they are telling you to eat more ribeye steaks and butter instead of deadly vegetable oils if you want to decrease your risk of pancreatic cancer.

Here is how I feel about those who continue to vilify saturated fats:

Here is another reason why you should be sure to eat plenty of grass-fed ruminant fats:

Vitamin K2 found in said fats will protect you from:

• bone fractures
• bone density loss
• coronary calcification (i.e. heart disease)

Now, what if we followed the exact same dietary recommendations, but added a weekly injection of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) during the first phase? Would this change your perception of the diet laid out in Part I? Current trends say yes.

For those of you who haven't heard yet, the hCG Diet was developed in the 1950s by Dr. Albert T. Simeons. hCG is a hormone found in the urine of pregnant women and Dr. Simeons claimed that it would mobilize stored fat, suppress appetite, and redistribute fat from the waist, hips, and thighs. Such claims resulted in hCG being the most widespread obesity medication administered in the United States during that era.

As early as 1962, the Journal of the American Medical Association warned against the hCG diet. In 1976, the FTC mandated that all patients be informed in writing that, "These weight reduction treatments include the injection of hCG, a drug which has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration as safe and effective in the treatment of obesity or weight control. There is no substantial evidence that hCG increases weight loss beyond that resulting from caloric restriction, that it causes a more attractive or "normal" distribution of fat, or that it decreases the hunger and discomfort associated with calorie-restrictive diets."

Since then, there have been multiple studies examining Dr. Simeons claims. There was even an analysis of the effectiveness of hCG in weight loss published in the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology in 1995. They concluded that "there is no scientific evidence that hCG is effective in the treatment of obesity; it does not bring about weight-loss or fat-redistribution, nor does it reduce hunger or induce a feeling of well-being." In fact, there has never been any scientific evidence to support the claims of Dr. Simeons, but that didn't matter to the general public back then and it obviously doesn't matter now.

If you're wondering why, here is your answer:

Meet Kevin Trudeau: convicted felon with no certified medical training, but infomercial salesman extraordinaire.

You see, shortly after the 1970s, the hCG Diet began to fade until it had all but disappeared. It wasn't until Trudeau released The Weight Loss Cure "They" Don't Want You to Know About in 2007 that the hCG Diet resurfaced. In it, he makes several fraudulent claims that even got him sued by the FTC. In 2008, he was sentenced to $5 million in fines and banned from infomercials for 3 years! Not exactly someone to be taking diet advice from.

In the end, what it all boils down to is that the hCG diet is simply another fad without a scientific basis. It has regained it's former popularity simply because our nation has become frighteningly overweight and everyone wants the quick and easy solution. It should be quite obvious though that following a 500 calorie a day Paleo Diet will result in rapid weight loss; with or without hCG injections.

This doesn't mean starving yourself is a good idea. With such a severe caloric restriction, your body will not only be burning stored fat, but also precious muscle tissue. Sure you'll weigh less, but you'll also be much weaker. To make matters worse, most people will eventually gain all of the pounds back after returning to their regular eating habits, but lost muscle weight will most likely return in the form of fat. This results in you weighing as much, if not more, as you did before starving yourself, but with a higher percentage of body fat.

Remember, if it seems too good to be true, it most definitely is!

What if I told you that you could lose 30 pounds in 30 days? Now that I have your interest, here are the guidelines to do so:

Phase I (weeks 1 - 5)

• 500 calories a day - MAXIMUM
• Allowable Items on Menu
  • Supplements:
    • multi-vitamin, b-vitamin, Stevia, sea salt, unfilitered apple cider vinegar (with the "Mother"), Bragg liquid aminos
  • Beverages:
    • tea, coffee, plain water, mineral water
  • Meats:
    • chicken breast, lean ground beef, shrimp, lobster, crab, tilapia, cod, halibut, lean roast, lean steak
  • Vegetables:
    • asparagus, beet greens, cabbage, celery, chard, chicory, cucumbers, fennel, green onions, kale, lettuce, spinach, tomatoes
  • Fruits:
    • apples, lemons, oranges, red grapefruit, strawberries
  • Condiments:
    • fresh salsa (no sugar), spice blends (no sugar)
• NO oils, butter, dressings, or any other condiment containing fat or sugar
• NO exercise allowed

Phase II (weeks 6 - 8 )

• 1500 calories a day - MAXIMUM
• Eat healthy meals consisting of the same meats, fruits and vegetables listed above
• Add in good fats like olive oil, nuts, dairy, eggs and avocados to achieve desired calorie level
• NO breads, potatoes, rice, pasta, sweets, etc.
• Regular exercise is recommended
• Make note of weight at start of phase II and continue to weigh yourself every day
  • If you gain 3 or more pounds from your starting weight, you must perform a Steak Day
    • Eat nothing for breakfast or lunch and have a large steak and an apple for dinner

So, what do you think? Is this something you would want to do? Is this something you could do? Post thoughts to comments.

As we continued to grow and the number of people seeking guidance increased, my time quickly disappeared. It has become so bad lately that some of you have had the awful experience of waiting a week or more for me to answer a single nutrition question.

To remedy this problem, we have begun offering Eat to Achieve services. I am excited to be able to once again prioritize your individual success.

Many of you know the term “muscle confusion” from the incredibly popular P90X training system. Is there really such a thing as “muscle confusion” or is this simply another great marketing ploy?

Confusion is a term that applies only to the act of thought and thus, the brain. Muscles are unable to be confused because they can’t think. Instead, muscles respond precisely to the demands imposed on them.

That should end the debate of whether or not “muscle confusion” is real.

A related problem I have come across a lot, is something I refer to as exercise ADD. I use this term to describe the individual who is unable to stick to a single training plan long enough to progress beyond the beginner level. Sure, anything will work in the short term. Simply expose your muscles to a new stimulus and you’re pretty much guaranteed to see a new adaptation occur. The quick results experienced in the first few weeks or months of a training program can be very satisfying. P90X is a great example of this.

As with any other skill though, progressing from beginner to intermediate is quicker and easier than progressing from intermediate to advanced and from advanced to elite. This can be compared to losing weight. The first 10 or 20 pounds are relatively easy compared to the final 5 or 10. Just because progress slows down though doesn’t mean the method is not working. All it really means is that progressing to the next level is going to take more time and effort: Maybe even a lot more of both.

With that being said, the principle of accommodation is very real. This means that progress will come to a halt and maybe even begin to regress if a muscle is exposed to the same stimulus for a long period of time. For example, if you back squat 200kg for 5 sets of 5 reps every week, you will eventually stop getting stronger and probably begin to regress. This is because the muscles involved will adapt to the given stimulus over time. Once adapted, the muscles will require a new, more demanding, stimulus. This doesn’t necessarily mean you have to change movements though. Changing the number of reps or amount of weight used is generally enough.

The gradual increase of said stimulus (amount of weight lifted in this example) is known as progressive overload. To make strength gains, you need to continuously expose the muscle to a stimulus that is greater than the one it has already adapted to.

The most basic form of progressive overload is called linear progression. With linear progression, you use the same volume (ex. 5 x 5) for a given movement (ex. back squat), but increase the weight a little every workout. A beginner should be able to make gains with linear progression for at least a year before needing more advanced methods (undulating, concurrent, and conjugate methods to name a few).

How does this apply to what we do at CrossFit Fire?

We are currently using a hybrid pendulum method composed of max effort and speed-strength days to avoid accommodation. No confusion necessary.