If the human body came with a service schedule and yearly MOT appointment would people be any healthier? It all depends upon if you serviced your body at an independent health provider or at the National Health Service (NHS). No matter whether you have a brand new Ferrari or beat up old wreck, you need to keep it well serviced. If its a beat up old wreck maybe you missed a few service dates during your ownership of the vehicle?

So, lets look at the best way to look after your vehicle (body) with the government recommended protocol via your local NHS service centre.

Firstly if its not running great, its starting to blow fumes out of the exhaust and its maybe not looking the same mean machine as it was in your 20's we need to think about the air filter, fuel system and exhaust system. 

The current NHS recommendation for your cars respiration seems to be just driving it more regularly (move more), maybe even give it a hard blast up the motorway (join a gym, do zumba, aerobics), if thats not enough see if the motorway (treadmill) has an incline that could increase the intensity even more. The higher your get the MPH (BPM) on the cars speedometer (heart rate monitor) and the longer you keep it there the better the results apparently.

However, at the independent garage we think those recommendations are a bit retarded, its important that if your cars not running right that we go back to basics,  unblocking the air filter and ensuring it can breath at idle.

The fuel system is complicated but if you follow the NHS guidelines you'll attempt to use less fuel in the hope that your engine management system (metabolism) with slow down the rate at which your vehicle burns fuel (so you become a ford fiesta rather than a Porsche). They might also ask you to consider using some artificial fuel enhancers aimed at improving performance.

Your independent garage will check the quality of fuel, check the fuel is correct for your engine and ensure you use adequate fuel for your journey, which includes making regular stops to fill up before you run out rather than waiting till the warning light comes on.

After this the independent garage will ensure that the fuel is being absorbed efficiently, if not they will endeavor to repair the problem as opposed the the NHS method of treating it with chemical additives (pharmaceuticals).

Exhaust system - If your blowing gasses out of your rear end the NHS service centre will once again suggest using the above methods such as using your vehicle more and putting less fuel in it.

Here at your local independent service centre we suggest once again looking at the quality of fuel used and checking fuel absorption etc.

Next time your car or body is in need of repair work have a think about what it really needs. Does it need pushing harder with less fuel or manmade fuels? Or does it need specific testing to find out the real issues?

For the past few days I've been in a period of hyperventilation (breathing excessively and causing too much carbon dioxide to be lost) and have ended up in a state of respiratory alkalosis due to the depletion of carbon dioxide. Lactic acid which is produced in response to the alkalosis caused by hyperventilation is now causing me to feel pretty rubbish so I thought its a good chance to point out why increased respiration via over exercising may not be a good idea. A lot of you ask about my dislike of aerobics, zumba, bootcamps, moronathons, and the general desire to make oneself more "economical" or as most people seem to call it "fitter".

Fit to drop

Many find it difficult to comprehend that oxygen can cause problems despite the fact that excess oxygen displaces carbon dioxide, causing increased lactic acid. This excess of lactate then displaces both oxygen and carbon dioxide which suppress our respiration.

For any of you that have taken a spin class (I know I taught them years ago but I ended up fit to drop with a low pulse, low temp, adrenal fatigue and a host of other problems which led me to open the study books), aerobics,zumba, bootcamps, running, cycling al a Bradley Wiggens etc you'll no doubt recognise the build up of lactic acid.

Low carbon dioxide is often linked to hypothyroidism in which their is usually lactate entering the blood at rest due to the adrenalin and noradrenalin (linked to your adrenal fatigue) which is produced to compensate for hypothyroidism. The excess production of lactate causes displacement of carbon dioxide from our blood which increases the rate at which we breath leading to a vicious circle in which hyperventilation becomes a real problem. I've consulted with many clients over the years who suffer real issues with hyperventilation that is linked to diet i.e hypothyroid.

For those of you with hyperventilation linked to hypothyroidism the aim is to reduce adrenalin, lactate, and free fatty acids which impairs our ability to utilise glucose  and can lead to edema within the lungs meaning further decreases in our ability to absorb oxygen.

This should be fixed via nutrition not an attempt to increase"fitness".

My last post the No Diet Diet talking about how to eat yourself slim caused quiet a fevered conversation on various online forums, some good, some bad as usual. Not since the days of Weird Diets - Concentration Calories and Masturbation have I seen such hysteria around a topic. The bad comments centered around various diet club forums keen to dispel the idea that low calorie might not actually work. Well the evidence doesn't lie, low calorie can only work short term (i.e very intermittently) in those with undamaged metabolisms, judging by the fact that your reading this, one would assume that is not you! The other thing low calorie works for is bringing repeat trade back to diet clubs with the "oh I'm so weak willed, its all my fault" attitude I've heard too often from dieters. Its not your fault, your being conned...

Ted Walther made a valid comment of FaceBook asking if the No Diet Diet is how Sumo Wrestlers get gihuge (yes that does say gihuge, its my mum's made up word, a combination of gigantic and huge that she genuinely thinks exists).

To get that big a sumo wrestlers diet and lifestyle is critical but despite what people think its not just eating lots that creates the results, its how you do it and the other things you do as well. It is achieved via vigorous training, eating and sleeping strategies rather than just a mass indulgence in food.

So, what do they do? Unlike my suggestions they try to consume as much as possible whilst damaging the metabolism as much as possible (they want to slow everything down so they can store). 

The largest meal is eaten prior to sleeping

Sumo wrestler's consume 20,000 calories a day, which they split into two supersize meals of 10,000 calories. Remember I found it oh so hard to manage 6000 and it sent me hyper (both hyper thyroid and hyper active as I just couldn't stop moving). By sleeping after a meal of 10,000 calories a sumo wrestlers body is able to process them slowly and is unable to burn of the energy via movement, heat and all the other things associated with a high metabolism.

They skip breakfast (like many of you no doubt)

Dr. Wayne Callaway, an obesity specialist at George Washington University confirms that skipping breakfast both triggers overeating later in the day and also causes a drop in metabolism. Remember I said the body needs a consistent supply of energy not large gaps.

The drink beer with meals

The good old empty calorie, masses of calories that not only add up the total but also spike hunger (yeah that's why they often offer you a free drink in restaurants while you wait for your table. If they're cheapskates they'll do the same trick using bread)
Not only do they have no nutritional value yet provide a mass of energy (which the sumo will attempt to store by sleeping), it also depletes they body of minerals (particularly calcium) meaning that hunger is yet again spiked as they body scavenges for the missing minerals. When you eat a food your body expects the minerals to be there, if they aren't then it sends a message asking for more food. This is how food processors get people consuming lots of junk. Drop a few minerals out and watch them chow down. The same applies to artificial sweeteners, the body registers sweetness but can't find anything so sends a message for more. Genius if your selling processed food, not so good if your attempting to cultivate a healthy body. One food company even brags about this in their tag line..."once you pop you can't stop".

They exercise in the morning before eating.

Yeah yeah, I've heard it all before, "exercising on an empty stomach burns fat". How idiotic does that sound? You take an unhealthy body that has a lowered metabolism to protect itself from the uncertainty it faces with regard to food intake. Suddenly you decide that jogging before breakfast is a good idea, and you think that your body will release those precious fat stores that its been keeping ready for when you do something this stupid. Wrong wrong wrong!! Exercise does increase metabolism, but and its a big butt, without the energy required to do this movement it will lower your metabolic rate in the long term. This is because your body tries to conserve as much fuel as possible by rationing what's available. Make sense?

Nap time after lunch

Now I'd happily have a nap after lunch like little Daisy my daughter does, but if I managed to eat 10,000 calories in one meal I'd hope that my healthy metabolism would be fired up and have me hyper active trying to burn of what it didn't need. Sumo wrestlers reportedly sleep for four hours post lunchtime.

How do they consume 20,000 calories a day?

Chanko-nabe is a Japanese stew and contains large quantities of protein sources such as chicken, fish and tofu. Interestingly I've had a Paleo dieter recently who started of well on his diet initially but in the two years following as his metabolism started slowing he became a mini sumo, not good considering he was a PT. Protein in excess has an effect of slowing the metabolism (especially muscle meats). However theirs no doubt it takes dedication to eat this much food. 6000 was a lot for me and the effects weren't great but I doubt even I could manage 20,000. We don't need 20,000 a day and our bodies would struggle to process it all, but equally we need more than 1800 or whatever is recommended by the low calorie club. What  you need is exactly or slightly more than your requires.

Hopefully this little post may make it more clearer if your current lifestyle has aspects of sumo training in it. Do you skip breakfast, drink empty calories, exercise when you're clearly not ready for it or even eat your largest meal just before bedtime.

The one question I'm always asked is, "how do I manage to eat so much?" It's by design rather than by accident. Logic is how my brain ticks so it made pure sense to me during my early studies, that a healthy human metabolism (one unharmed by the numerous diets available on the interweb, in bookstores, via your gym, magazines, cereal manufacturers, your Doctor or just a friend of a friend who once ate cabbage soup and lost 4lbs (and stank the room out with their putrid aroma). Yes that's right diets everywhere and we've all tried them. 

As an adult with Asperger's Syndrome, I'm blessed with a diet experiment gift. I thought I had immense willpower but I don't. I just love a routine and a rule, if I make a rule, such as I'm going to the gym every day for a year (4 hours a session), then I do it. As such I've tried everything to the letter, low fat, low calorie, paleo, MT, fasting, the list goes on. I tried them all for a year or more to see the real effect and never once slipped. Most people do slip, so when it doesn't work they blame themselves, with comments such as "I missed a few gym sessions so that's why it didn't work". I did 4 hours a day for 395 days in total and lost 4lbs. The PT told me I'd just gained muscle and that it weighed more. This is very true muscle does weigh more, but I wobbled a lot so it wasn't muscle...it was fat. I'd got fatter going to the gym!!!!

People engage in diets but slip up at the weekend and have a treat (they have to, the body is starving so signals that it want's energy) so once again they blame themselves and feel guilt rather than blaming the poor diet. Out of all the diets Paleo was the one I stuck with the longest as it seemed to be the answer. Sadly it wasn't and I ended up pretty sick and just sick of the lifestyle (I got told it's not a diet, its a lifestyle. It's clearly a diet!)

Any diet will work to help lose weight, but the success depends upon the position you start from. If you're a young college athlete thats lean, mean and an eating machine, that has never done a diet, you need to lean up for something so you do a brief/intermittent diet of some sort. No doubt it will work, your body is expecting to be fed as per usual and it doesn't get it, hence you get leaner. If you've read a few "fitness" magazines and get hooked into carrying it on, then eventually your metabolism will decide you've packed your bags and moved to Ethiopia where there is a famine. It will then send constant messages to you telling you to eat whenever you can, naturally you use your willpower for a long as possible. However, unless you've cultivated yourself an eating disorder your body wins and you eat the food, any food, often bad food. Your body breaths a sigh of relief, its avoided the famine and you're still alive. Now guilt kicks in and your curse yourself for being a "fat pig" with weak willpower. So fairly soon you try again, and so begins the cycle of intermittent starvation and binge cycling which is the worlds biggest diet regime.

Intermittent fasting is big now, but everyone wants to skip the most important stage, teaching the body that food is plentiful. Everyone ignores the damage they've done over the years and jumps straight in with a fast very early on (usually day one). The problem with most dieters diets is that they double up, they do low fat but also fall into low calorie at the same time, they do atkins/paleo (yes I know they aren't the same) and combine it with low calorie (due to being unable to eat anymore). You name the diet, there is always a touch of calorie control, either intentionally or by default (i.e raw food is hard to consume enough).

So, why doesn't low calorie work? Logic comes into play again here I'm afraid. So I'm going to have to go a little Sherlock on you and state the obvious. Does it make sense that the human metabolism would speed up when food was plentiful or scarce? The answer in case you missed it, is that when food is plentiful the metabolism will speed up. You'll get hotter, you'll feel like being more active, your pulse will raise. All this depends upon this being a constant, i.e you're eating consistently. The other way round your metabolism will slow in response to a famine, temp will drop, pulse will drop to conserve energy and you will feel lethargic as your body conserves it's supplies.

Now I can here some of you crying out a question...."but I eat too much." No you don't, you binge and starve. At no point are you consistent in your eating, you're either eating "healthy" and accidentally low calorie, or eating false foods in which their they might be calorie dense but they remain low nutrient (i.e you're body becomes malnourished which means despite the apparent volume you're actually under-consuming). Consistency is all that matters, if your going to eat 1400 calories a day, be prepared to do it forever because the moment you stop, your body will make you eat till it feels safe whilst storing fat ready for the next famine. If your going to go for a mammoth 6000 calories a day be prepared to ride it out (if you've spent a lifetime damaging your metabolism) until your metabolism begins to trust you. When it does, set point will alter as your metabolism realises food is in abundance and their is no need to store.

So, if I don't recommend eating 6000, what do I recommend as a starting point to fix everything? Everyone in the industry should understand Basal Metabolic Rate. (BMR)

We use energy 24/7, even whilst asleep. If you want to add in activity such as scratching your nose then you need more energy. BMR accounts for breathing, temperature, essential bodily functions etc.

To achieve their BMR, a sedentary individual should consume 25 calories per kilo of bodyweight per day. Bob a sleeping man of 75 kilos would need to eat:

75 kilos x 25 calories =  1,875 calories a day

Potentially body fat percentage can affect these figures but I never use this bit as unless you're just sleeping then you'll need to carry that body-fat around with you which = more expenditure. However your welcome to use this bit as all that matters is that you stick with the same figure each day.

If we assume our 75kg man has 20% body fat, this means around 15kg of his body weight is fat.
75kg – 15kg body fat =  60kg

If his aim is to retain his lean percentage but while reaching a goal of 10% body fat, he needs to lose 9 kilos of fat.

So instead of weighing: 60kg + 15kg (15% fat) =  75 kg

He is aiming for: 60kg / 0.90 =  66.6kg (10% fat) =  66.6kg

Using the formula of 25 calories per kilo of bodyweight, he should be aiming for a daily intake of:

25 x 66.6 =  1,666 calories

So if your adding in the body-fat equation your at 1,666 calories and if your doing it my way your at a much more reasonable 1875 calories per day. Right before you all run of to eat that way we need to add in something else as I doubt many of you just sleep all day.


The Harris Benedict Equation is a formula that uses your BMR and then applies an activity factor to determine your total daily energy expenditure (calories). The only factor omitted by the Harris Benedict Equation is lean body mass. Remember, leaner bodies need more calories than less leaner ones. Therefore, this equation will be very accurate in all but the very muscular (will under-estimate calorie needs) and the very fat (will over-estimate calorie needs).

Harris Benedict Formula

To determine Sleeping Bob's total daily calorie needs if he were to get out of bed or scratch his ass, multiply the BMR by the appropriate activity factor, as follows:

1. If you are sedentary (little or no exercise) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.2
2. If you are lightly active (light exercise/sports 1-3 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.375
3. If you are moderatetely active (moderate exercise/sports 3-5 days/week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.55
4. If you are very active (hard exercise/sports 6-7 days a week) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.725
5. If you are extra active (very hard exercise/sports & physical job or 2x training) : Calorie-Calculation = BMR x 1.9

Total Calorie Needs Example
If Bob was sedentary, multiply your BMR (1785) by 1.2 = 2250 through to his extra active amount of 3391 (BMR 1785 by 1.9 = 3391). This is the total number of calories your body needs. Forget any junk about this is what your body needs minus so many calories to lose a lb a week. End of story, this is what your body needs to function full stop, anything less is damaging to the metabolism, even 200 calories less is sending a signal that things need to slow down...which if you've clicked with the logic of this post you should realise is not good.


So why 6000 calories? Well, I like to be proved right and on the course we got given 3 formulas, one of which you have read above. All three provided a different total which confused my fellow students at Loughborough University. They differed by 50-100 calories per day which made no sense. Professor I Cantrememberhisname stated that they were just formulas and that it did not matter what the figure was as long as it was adhered to consistently. And their was my seminal moment in nutritional consultancy, the fact that made my name as the guy that makes you eat food, the reason gyms kicked me out due to making people slim via little exercise and lots of food. I picked 6000 out of thin air based upon the knowledge that as long as I stuck with it my set point would lower and I would get slimmer. 6000 is a horrible amount to eat and the end result was that I was too hot, too thin and didn't look too healthy (plus people kept telling me to eat due to how skinny I was). If your going to do it pick a figure that is more reasonable such as 4000 calories.

"It was noted by Keys that to fully rehabilitate the body 4000 kcals daily was necessary and that it would take this abundance of calories to restore normal function. Even supplementing with vitamins and minerals was of little use with out a great quantity of food." Ancel Key - Human Starvation

So for all my friends currently doing a particular diet that requires mineral supplementation to correct various factors (still the best diet I know), are you really just doing this diet or are you doing low calorie at the same time?

Apologies for any spelling mistakes or grammatical errors, written in a rush without checking as its almost my bedtime. Will check it though and tidy it up tomorrow.

Firstly lets start with a definition of colic, it is a condition in which an otherwise healthy baby cries or displays symptoms of distress. Epidemiology suggests that various foods such as chocolate, onions, the dreaded broccoli and cabbage amongst other foods.

The crying often increases during a specific period of the day, particularly the early evening possibly due to most people eating the largest meal to late in the day when the digestive system is at its weakest (yours and the babies).

Like most things in life we prefer to find a pharmaceutical "cure" rather than track down the problem and eliminate it. Nowadays Infacol is king in the colic business, the oral suspension contains the active ingredient simeticone, which is a type of medicine called an 'anti-foaming agent. Like many medicines sold to the unsuspecting public it is touted as safe with no risk. I've posted in the past about the dodgy ingredients that have a number of side effects individually have numerous side effects yet according to the manufacturers have none when they are mixed ready to be used on children.

Should we trust the pharmaceutical companies that sell us products? Ideally no, one should look beyond masking the symptoms and try investigating the problems. One of my issues with drug companies is that they frequently claim things are safe, then bring out a new version when the old one racks up too many complaints (try investigating vaccinations). Just because something is claimed to be "safe" now, does not mean it will be in 5 years time. Think back, smoking was once sold as an asthma treatment.

Back in Victorian times (my favourite era) Godfrey Cordial was a patent medicine (don't want people copying the magic do we) given to children suffering colic. The recipe was sassafras, opium, brandy/rectified spirit, caraway seed, and treacle. There were various different preparations taking the Godfrey name.

Often referred to as "quietness" as they used it to drug their children into sleeping through the night was an acceptable way to avoid missing work. Godfrey's mixture of morphine and treacle had a tendency to separate after time, with the morphine sinking to the bottom. Sold out of large jugs so the purchaser of the final few doses from the jug invariably got straight morphine. 

Eventually medical officers became convinced that a major causes of infant mortality was the practice of children being dosed on narcotics such as opium. Local to me in Nottingham a druggist (wouldn't it be better if they were still called that nowadays), sold four hundred gallons of laudanum annually. In the Fenlands (Eastern UK) 'poppy tea' containing opium was popular and doctors reported how 'infants were wasted from it'.

As it still tends to nowadays opium killed far more through starvation than directly through overdose. Dr. Greenhow, investigating for the Privy Council, noted how children 'kept in a state of continued narcotism will be thereby disinclined for food, and be but imperfectly nourished.' Marasmus, or inanition, and death from severe malnutrition would result, but the coroner was likely to record the death as 'debility from birth,' or 'lack of breast milk,' or simply 'starvation.'

Will Infacol become the new Godfrey Cordial that some blogger is posting about in a few centuries? Probably not but their is a lesson to be learned, do not trust that a chemical concoction is safe and always investigate other possibilities. And be aware that any possible problems will no doubt be linked to anything but the drug.

Check the video below for a little experiment that shows just how harsh Infacol may be for little ones insides.

References

Wohl, Anthony S. Endangered Lives: Public Health in Victorian Britain. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1983. pp. 34-35.