1 00:00:00,040 --> 00:00:04,000 Sugar diet obviously is gaining traction, momentum, hype on 2 00:00:04,000 --> 00:00:05,840 social media. You've got some pretty prevalent 3 00:00:05,840 --> 00:00:09,120 figures really hyping it up and promoting it. 4 00:00:09,200 --> 00:00:12,920 In which case you are exclusively consuming very high 5 00:00:12,920 --> 00:00:16,160 glycemic and deck sugars, fruits, honeys, syrups, 6 00:00:16,160 --> 00:00:19,000 leveraging candy, pure table sugars. 7 00:00:19,080 --> 00:00:21,160 I've seen a lot of gummy worms on social media. 8 00:00:21,160 --> 00:00:25,320 All the while losing body weight at a pretty impressive rate. 9 00:00:25,320 --> 00:00:29,160 You know 510 lbs a week. The whole concept behind it is 10 00:00:29,160 --> 00:00:32,960 basically that you are improving your metabolic rate. 11 00:00:33,200 --> 00:00:37,480 I obviously got a ton of questions on this being pretty 12 00:00:37,480 --> 00:00:40,000 much the antithesis of the sugar diet. 13 00:00:40,320 --> 00:00:42,880 Following the strict keto now for over a decade, everything 14 00:00:42,880 --> 00:00:46,640 that people are wanting to do with the sugar diet, I basically 15 00:00:46,640 --> 00:00:48,920 did with the opposite of the Sugar Dine. 16 00:00:49,040 --> 00:00:52,560 What is going on, y'all? We've got a very involved 17 00:00:52,560 --> 00:00:55,520 podcast today. I'm going to be going over my 18 00:00:55,520 --> 00:00:58,880 latest experiments and I'm going to be flipping through several 19 00:00:58,880 --> 00:01:01,600 different windows. This would be optimal if you're 20 00:01:01,600 --> 00:01:06,480 viewing this on YouTube or in video format as opposed to just 21 00:01:06,480 --> 00:01:08,640 listening to an audio, but I'm going to try to explain 22 00:01:08,640 --> 00:01:10,400 everything. So that's relevant if you're 23 00:01:10,400 --> 00:01:12,920 just listening to the audio. I was just going to do this 24 00:01:12,920 --> 00:01:15,120 solo, but I've actually got Greg here as well. 25 00:01:15,120 --> 00:01:17,880 He's going to kind of offer some banter back and forth, 26 00:01:17,880 --> 00:01:21,240 especially as I'm tabbing between slides and finding data. 27 00:01:21,240 --> 00:01:25,360 So there's not just this silence in between that, but I just 28 00:01:25,360 --> 00:01:30,760 conducted an experiment kind of in response to the sugar diet 29 00:01:30,880 --> 00:01:32,360 trend. So we're about to dive into 30 00:01:32,360 --> 00:01:34,880 that. Greg is currently on the sugar 31 00:01:34,880 --> 00:01:38,120 diet. No, the opposite, the opposite. 32 00:01:38,920 --> 00:01:41,160 So I'm excited. Everybody should know you, Greg, 33 00:01:41,160 --> 00:01:44,360 So no need to introduce you because everyone listens to you 34 00:01:44,360 --> 00:01:47,440 all the time anyways. But to give you all a little 35 00:01:47,680 --> 00:01:50,880 back story as to why this experiment was even conducted. 36 00:01:51,920 --> 00:01:56,320 So sugar diet obviously is gaining traction momentum hype 37 00:01:56,320 --> 00:01:58,400 on social media. You've got some pretty prevalent 38 00:01:58,400 --> 00:02:01,680 figures really hyping it up and promoting it. 39 00:02:02,280 --> 00:02:06,000 And the whole concept behind it is basically that you are 40 00:02:06,000 --> 00:02:12,080 improving your metabolic rate via the pathways of FGF 21 41 00:02:12,080 --> 00:02:18,600 hormone which is risen basically pronounced when you reduce as 42 00:02:18,600 --> 00:02:21,840 they claim, pretty much consume nothing but sugars. 43 00:02:21,920 --> 00:02:24,800 Therefore your protein consumption is relatively low or 44 00:02:24,800 --> 00:02:27,200 non existent. There's been multiple different 45 00:02:27,200 --> 00:02:30,600 protocols put out there as to how to best operate around it. 46 00:02:31,080 --> 00:02:32,800 I've seen a few of these different protocols. 47 00:02:32,800 --> 00:02:37,800 Some recommend sugar fasting, in which case you are exclusively 48 00:02:37,800 --> 00:02:43,240 consuming very high glycemic and deck sugars, fruits, you know, 49 00:02:43,240 --> 00:02:46,280 honeys, syrups. A lot of people are promoting or 50 00:02:46,280 --> 00:02:51,360 leveraging candy, pure dextrose, sucrose, pure table sugars. 51 00:02:51,760 --> 00:02:54,240 A lot of people, I've seen a lot of gummy worms on social media, 52 00:02:54,240 --> 00:02:56,480 a lot of people using miconics, things like that. 53 00:02:57,160 --> 00:03:00,280 So basically just pure sugar, whether it come from natural 54 00:03:00,280 --> 00:03:06,520 sources like fruit or, you know, man made sources like candy for 55 00:03:06,520 --> 00:03:09,160 sugar fasting periods in which they'll have several days a week 56 00:03:09,160 --> 00:03:10,920 where they're only consuming sugar. 57 00:03:11,240 --> 00:03:14,760 And the whole concept has been to eat that ad libitum. 58 00:03:14,760 --> 00:03:19,640 So as much as you can consume or tolerate, all the while losing 59 00:03:19,760 --> 00:03:22,240 body weight at a pretty impressive rate. 60 00:03:22,240 --> 00:03:27,320 Some people touting the loss of you know, 510 lbs a week with 61 00:03:27,320 --> 00:03:31,400 this approach. I obviously got a ton of 62 00:03:31,400 --> 00:03:35,600 questions on this being pretty much the antithesis of the sugar 63 00:03:35,600 --> 00:03:38,440 diet following the strict keto now for over a decade. 64 00:03:39,080 --> 00:03:41,480 So I decided to actually peel the curtain back on what was 65 00:03:41,480 --> 00:03:44,920 happening here mechanistically and then conduct an experiment 66 00:03:45,640 --> 00:03:50,240 kind of in contrary to it, but using a similar pathway via this 67 00:03:50,240 --> 00:03:54,360 FGF 21 hormone. So to give you even more back 68 00:03:54,360 --> 00:03:57,280 story, I had just gone through like a 2 month period where I 69 00:03:57,280 --> 00:04:00,680 was gradually reducing my calories down to about 2500, 70 00:04:00,920 --> 00:04:03,360 lost about 1012 lbs in the process. 71 00:04:03,600 --> 00:04:07,400 So I was down at 2500 calories when all of this sugar, that 72 00:04:07,400 --> 00:04:10,040 hype hit the fan. So I decided to do an 73 00:04:10,040 --> 00:04:14,280 experiment, but I wanted to kind of give myself kind of a period 74 00:04:14,280 --> 00:04:17,480 where I could eat more food having come off of that slight 75 00:04:17,480 --> 00:04:19,440 deficit, which for me was not a major deficit. 76 00:04:19,440 --> 00:04:22,120 My maintenance intake for context sake is right around 77 00:04:22,120 --> 00:04:27,040 3000 calories. So I had basically a week post. 78 00:04:27,320 --> 00:04:29,840 You know, I don't want to use the word mini cup, but for the 79 00:04:29,960 --> 00:04:31,360 the listeners will use that word. 80 00:04:31,920 --> 00:04:35,560 So I basically had a week after that 2500 calorie drop where I 81 00:04:36,240 --> 00:04:40,640 ate ad libinum or you know, tried to average around 3000 82 00:04:40,640 --> 00:04:41,920 calories. I had a couple days that were 83 00:04:41,920 --> 00:04:45,840 4500 calories. I had one day that was fasted 84 00:04:45,840 --> 00:04:49,120 basically just kind of like a disconnect from that gradual 85 00:04:49,120 --> 00:04:51,920 reduction in intake that I've had over the past few months. 86 00:04:52,200 --> 00:04:55,080 So I had like a week washout period where I was doing that, 87 00:04:55,320 --> 00:04:59,520 which from scientific standpoint is not really a great washout 88 00:04:59,520 --> 00:05:00,840 period. But I'm a human being and not a 89 00:05:00,840 --> 00:05:03,040 lab mouse. So I wanted to just kind of do 90 00:05:03,040 --> 00:05:05,120 what I wanted to do from a nutrition standpoint. 91 00:05:05,880 --> 00:05:09,320 And then I was planning on jumping into this experiments. 92 00:05:10,720 --> 00:05:13,560 So I started doing that for a few days and then Nick Norwich 93 00:05:13,560 --> 00:05:16,600 reached out to me, asked if you wanted if I want to do a more 94 00:05:16,880 --> 00:05:19,400 involved, you know, study with this. 95 00:05:19,400 --> 00:05:22,520 I agreed. But due to that, you know, 96 00:05:22,760 --> 00:05:25,400 variability in that week, I don't know if he'll use my data 97 00:05:25,400 --> 00:05:27,880 or not, but I have all my data. So I'm going to share it with 98 00:05:27,880 --> 00:05:30,600 you here. So let's dive into it. 99 00:05:31,360 --> 00:05:37,360 There's a study called from the Nature Metabolism journal and 100 00:05:37,360 --> 00:05:41,000 the title of it is Dietary Protein Restriction Elevates FGF 101 00:05:41,000 --> 00:05:44,320 21 Levels and Energy Requirements to Maintain Body 102 00:05:44,320 --> 00:05:47,680 Weight in Lean Men. And for those listening, I'm 103 00:05:47,680 --> 00:05:50,040 just going to go ahead and read the abstract here, so bear with 104 00:05:50,040 --> 00:05:52,080 me. Dietary protein restriction 105 00:05:52,080 --> 00:05:56,080 increases energy expenditure and enhances insulin sensitivity in 106 00:05:56,080 --> 00:05:58,560 mice. However, the effects of 107 00:05:58,600 --> 00:06:01,840 eucaloric protein restricted diets in healthy humans remains 108 00:06:01,840 --> 00:06:05,160 unexplored. Here we show in lean healthy men 109 00:06:05,160 --> 00:06:08,360 that a protein restricted diet meeting the minimum protein 110 00:06:08,360 --> 00:06:12,280 requirements for five weeks nesitates an increase in energy 111 00:06:12,280 --> 00:06:16,120 intake to uphold body weight, regardless of whether proteins 112 00:06:16,120 --> 00:06:18,000 are placed with fats or carbohydrates. 113 00:06:18,600 --> 00:06:21,120 Upon reverting to the customary higher protein intake in the 114 00:06:21,120 --> 00:06:24,160 following five weeks, energy requirements return to baseline 115 00:06:24,160 --> 00:06:26,400 levels, thus preventing weight gain. 116 00:06:26,400 --> 00:06:30,960 We also show that fasting plasma FGF 21 levels increase during 117 00:06:30,960 --> 00:06:34,600 protein restriction. Proteomic analysis of human 118 00:06:34,600 --> 00:06:38,440 white adipose tissue and an FGF 21 knockout mice reveal 119 00:06:38,440 --> 00:06:42,440 alterations in key components of the electron transport training 120 00:06:42,720 --> 00:06:46,880 within white adipose tissue mitochondria, notably in male 121 00:06:46,880 --> 00:06:48,520 mice. These changes appear to be 122 00:06:48,520 --> 00:06:52,920 dependent on the FGF 21. In conclusion, we demonstrate 123 00:06:52,920 --> 00:06:56,240 that maintaining body weight during dietary protein 124 00:06:56,240 --> 00:07:00,600 restriction in healthy lean men requires a higher energy intake 125 00:07:00,600 --> 00:07:05,040 partitionally or partially driven by FGF 21 mediated 126 00:07:05,040 --> 00:07:08,040 mitochondrial adaptations in adipose tissue. 127 00:07:08,800 --> 00:07:12,520 So has a mouthful going into it now. 128 00:07:12,680 --> 00:07:15,280 The whole premise of this experiment was basically do to 129 00:07:15,280 --> 00:07:18,320 do the opposite of the sugar diet. 130 00:07:18,520 --> 00:07:23,280 To illustrate what would happen in me if I replaced what people 131 00:07:23,280 --> 00:07:28,440 are using sugar with higher fat intake, all the while keeping 132 00:07:28,440 --> 00:07:31,840 protein incredibly low, that would in theory also increase F 133 00:07:31,840 --> 00:07:35,160 shift 21 and result in a similar response. 134 00:07:35,160 --> 00:07:38,680 Now I am in a building phase. Right now I do not want to go 135 00:07:38,680 --> 00:07:41,520 into a caloric deficit because that would be kind of productive 136 00:07:41,520 --> 00:07:45,600 to me building more lean tissue. So I wanted to do this and see 137 00:07:45,600 --> 00:07:49,360 if I could increase my total intake above baseline and see if 138 00:07:49,360 --> 00:07:52,760 I can maintain weight, which would in theory mean that if I 139 00:07:52,760 --> 00:07:56,880 was to keep the same caloric intake, I would drop weight. 140 00:07:56,960 --> 00:07:58,840 But again, I'm not trying to drop weight right now. 141 00:07:59,560 --> 00:08:05,080 So in essence, high level view, if people were to do this, they 142 00:08:05,080 --> 00:08:06,960 would basically have a similar response to what people are 143 00:08:06,960 --> 00:08:11,080 doing with the sugar diet by way of, you know, minimizing protein 144 00:08:11,080 --> 00:08:15,360 consumption to increase FGF 21. If they were to do so at a 145 00:08:15,360 --> 00:08:17,960 maintenance caloric intake, they would in theory lose weight. 146 00:08:18,240 --> 00:08:20,960 I was not trying to lose weight, so I bumped up my intake 147 00:08:20,960 --> 00:08:23,400 significantly. Well, it makes sense so far, 148 00:08:23,400 --> 00:08:26,240 Greg. All right, so let's dive into 149 00:08:26,240 --> 00:08:30,160 it. I decided to again take my 150 00:08:30,160 --> 00:08:34,159 maintenance intake, which was about 3000 calories and then be 151 00:08:34,159 --> 00:08:35,679 very aggressive with the increase. 152 00:08:35,679 --> 00:08:39,360 So I decided to make my new intake 4000 calories, so an 153 00:08:39,360 --> 00:08:42,520 additional 1000 calories above, above baseline. 154 00:08:42,919 --> 00:08:47,440 And I was targeting nearly a four to one ratio, 4 to 1 being 155 00:08:47,440 --> 00:08:53,720 defined as carbohydrates plus protein in grams times 4 is how 156 00:08:53,720 --> 00:08:56,640 much fat you need to consume to have that 4 to 1 ratio. 157 00:08:56,920 --> 00:08:59,600 I think Nick was doing it based off of net carbs and not total 158 00:08:59,600 --> 00:09:01,600 carbs. So I was following a similar 159 00:09:01,600 --> 00:09:03,720 protocol. So I was a little shy of a true 160 00:09:03,720 --> 00:09:07,040 4:00 to 1:00. But the study that was done in 161 00:09:07,040 --> 00:09:11,400 the Nature Metabolism magazine or article basically had protein 162 00:09:11,400 --> 00:09:15,920 at 9 percent or less of total calories for the day. 163 00:09:16,000 --> 00:09:19,840 So every day throughout this experiment, I targeted 9% or 164 00:09:19,840 --> 00:09:24,040 fewer calories from protein as a percentage of total caloric 165 00:09:24,040 --> 00:09:28,960 intake for the day, which for me wound up being around 400 grams 166 00:09:28,960 --> 00:09:34,120 of fat, 75 to 85 grams of protein a day, and depending on 167 00:09:34,120 --> 00:09:38,040 what I was consuming, 30 to 50 grams of total carbohydrates for 168 00:09:38,040 --> 00:09:39,400 the day. Typically, I was using a lot 169 00:09:39,400 --> 00:09:42,280 more like cauliflower rice to soak up oils and stuff. 170 00:09:43,200 --> 00:09:47,280 So to kind of illustrate what a typical day of eating for me was 171 00:09:47,280 --> 00:09:51,680 over this two week span, I would wake up, I'd have, you know, a 172 00:09:51,680 --> 00:09:55,400 tablespoon of ghee in my coffee along with some heavy cream. 173 00:09:56,320 --> 00:09:59,400 On this particular day, I had some of that what's that stuff 174 00:09:59,400 --> 00:10:04,840 cost like the mascarpone cheese, peanut butter, macadamia nuts, a 175 00:10:04,840 --> 00:10:08,720 keto brick or two more ghee and then more macadamia nuts. 176 00:10:08,720 --> 00:10:11,400 And then for dinner, the big hack that I had to hit this high 177 00:10:11,400 --> 00:10:14,720 fat intake was I would have a can of cod liver, which is 178 00:10:14,720 --> 00:10:17,840 pretty much 500 calories primarily coming from fat. 179 00:10:18,520 --> 00:10:20,400 They would still be the liver in there and have that. 180 00:10:20,960 --> 00:10:23,560 I have that soaking up with a bunch of cauliflower rice. 181 00:10:23,560 --> 00:10:26,640 Usually I was doing 200 to 300 grams of that a day. 182 00:10:26,640 --> 00:10:29,080 I put some Primal Kitchen dipping sauce in there to 183 00:10:29,080 --> 00:10:33,440 increase the fat, took a few eggs in there with it with two 184 00:10:33,440 --> 00:10:36,040 tablespoons of butter, 2 tablespoons of ghee to pretty 185 00:10:36,040 --> 00:10:39,280 much hit that target intake. This day for instance, my intake 186 00:10:39,280 --> 00:10:46,840 was 4053 calories and that was 86.6 grams of protein, 62 grams 187 00:10:46,840 --> 00:10:47,920 of carbs. That may have been the highest 188 00:10:47,920 --> 00:10:50,920 carb day, most of which is coming from the fiber and the 189 00:10:50,920 --> 00:10:55,120 cauliflower rice, and then 391 grams of fat. 190 00:10:55,120 --> 00:10:58,960 So pretty significant increase in dietary fat. 191 00:10:58,960 --> 00:11:03,600 Normally I'm consuming around 200 to 250 grams of fat and most 192 00:11:03,600 --> 00:11:06,280 often with this I was around 400 grams of fat. 193 00:11:07,120 --> 00:11:09,120 Going into it, I thought I was going to have a ton of GI 194 00:11:09,120 --> 00:11:12,520 distress, but honestly, I had zero GI distress. 195 00:11:12,520 --> 00:11:15,200 I had no loose stool. That was honestly one of the 196 00:11:15,200 --> 00:11:16,560 biggest surprises. I had no GI. 197 00:11:16,800 --> 00:11:17,920 I was going to. Ask you about that. 198 00:11:18,040 --> 00:11:19,000 Yeah. Yeah, it was. 199 00:11:19,280 --> 00:11:20,920 Pretty smooth. That's a little bit of a shock 200 00:11:20,920 --> 00:11:23,720 to your normal. Yeah, definitely a higher 201 00:11:23,720 --> 00:11:27,760 increase in fat and very little protein relative to my normal 202 00:11:27,760 --> 00:11:29,720 consumption. So that's what typical day of 203 00:11:29,720 --> 00:11:32,280 eating look like throughout this two week span. 204 00:11:33,080 --> 00:11:35,440 And then if we look at my other chronometer data here from a 205 00:11:35,440 --> 00:11:39,880 visual standpoint, just to kind of give you all some context, 206 00:11:40,200 --> 00:11:43,640 this period here was where I was actually in that quote UN quote 207 00:11:43,640 --> 00:11:46,400 mini cut. And then I had a few refeed ad 208 00:11:46,400 --> 00:11:48,280 libitum days. I fasted one day. 209 00:11:48,280 --> 00:11:52,400 That's what that was actually did not track these two days, 210 00:11:52,400 --> 00:11:54,920 but that was probably 25000 calorie days. 211 00:11:55,160 --> 00:11:58,680 So a pretty high intake to kind of just eat whatever I wanted to 212 00:11:58,680 --> 00:12:01,840 for that spam, which basically defeats the purpose of having a 213 00:12:02,160 --> 00:12:05,200 lead in a week. But you know, I'm a human, not a 214 00:12:05,200 --> 00:12:09,600 mouse. So this span here, I started the 215 00:12:09,600 --> 00:12:15,840 experiment on June 9th and I went until the 23rd of June. 216 00:12:16,600 --> 00:12:20,800 So pretty much consuming around 4000 calories that entire span. 217 00:12:21,560 --> 00:12:24,400 And then that's what I'm looking like there. 218 00:12:24,400 --> 00:12:28,520 And if we look at my weights over that span as well, after 219 00:12:28,520 --> 00:12:31,920 those two 5000 calorie days and kind of add aluminum eating, my 220 00:12:31,920 --> 00:12:34,880 weight did jump up quite a bit, which I would have expected. 221 00:12:34,880 --> 00:12:39,720 I think I went from 176 at my lowest during that mini cuts. 222 00:12:40,360 --> 00:12:42,840 I don't even like the word that I'm using mini cut, but people 223 00:12:42,840 --> 00:12:46,200 understand that. And then after having a week of 224 00:12:46,200 --> 00:12:49,480 consuming more food and you know, 2 pretty high, high 225 00:12:49,480 --> 00:12:52,760 caloric intake days, my weight jumped to 183.2. 226 00:12:53,440 --> 00:12:56,760 All right. And then I started the 227 00:12:56,760 --> 00:13:02,200 experiments on the 9th at a weight of 183.2. 228 00:13:02,320 --> 00:13:05,040 So that's where the 4000 calories basically started. 229 00:13:05,720 --> 00:13:08,440 There's a little bit of a discrepancy there because again, 230 00:13:08,640 --> 00:13:11,440 I was eating less, ate a whole lot more. 231 00:13:11,800 --> 00:13:14,520 And then my weight jumped up largely from water retention, 232 00:13:14,520 --> 00:13:17,080 from eating more saltier foods, things like that. 233 00:13:17,840 --> 00:13:23,400 But over that span, while eating 4000 calories, my weights had a 234 00:13:23,400 --> 00:13:26,640 little bit of an increase in the first few days, and then you can 235 00:13:26,640 --> 00:13:29,680 see it just steadily dropping throughout the time of the 236 00:13:29,680 --> 00:13:32,600 experiment. I believe on the last day of the 237 00:13:32,600 --> 00:13:36,200 experiment, June 23rd, my weight was 179.2. 238 00:13:36,880 --> 00:13:42,320 So pretty much flushed out that water and then dropped to just 239 00:13:42,320 --> 00:13:46,160 right above where I was. But just keep in mind here, I'm 240 00:13:46,160 --> 00:13:49,400 eating 4000 calories whereas before I was eating 2500 241 00:13:49,400 --> 00:13:51,840 calories. So pretty impressive from a 242 00:13:51,840 --> 00:13:54,840 weight standpoint there. For all intents and purposes, it 243 00:13:54,840 --> 00:13:58,160 was holding stable or dropping relative to what I would be at 244 00:13:58,200 --> 00:14:03,680 baseline intake 3000 calories. Now if we look at my AI 245 00:14:03,680 --> 00:14:07,760 dashboard of this experiment to do a little bit more of a deep 246 00:14:07,760 --> 00:14:11,920 dive here, you can see just that span of time. 247 00:14:12,320 --> 00:14:18,040 And I am again starting the experiments at about 183 on 6/9. 248 00:14:18,400 --> 00:14:21,360 And then you can kind of see the trend line holding pretty stable 249 00:14:21,360 --> 00:14:24,320 or actually taking a dip there towards the end. 250 00:14:25,280 --> 00:14:28,240 So, you know, pretty impressive trend line while eating 251 00:14:28,840 --> 00:14:31,200 significantly more food. And here you can see my protein 252 00:14:31,200 --> 00:14:35,080 consumption throughout the whole time at about 9% of total 253 00:14:35,080 --> 00:14:37,880 calories. Carbs were at about 6% of total 254 00:14:37,880 --> 00:14:42,760 calories and then fat was typically around 85 to 87% of 255 00:14:42,760 --> 00:14:45,040 total calories coming from fat throughout that experiment. 256 00:14:45,320 --> 00:14:50,240 And then over the course of that span, my average caloric intake 257 00:14:50,240 --> 00:14:56,040 was 41141 hundred 39186. So pretty much right there 258 00:14:56,040 --> 00:15:00,880 around 4000 calories. Now I decided to get blood work 259 00:15:01,320 --> 00:15:05,400 both when did I got, I got the first lab on the 25th I believe. 260 00:15:05,400 --> 00:15:08,240 So a little bit in the middle of that intermediary week. 261 00:15:08,480 --> 00:15:12,920 And then again on the last day of the experiment, I anticipated 262 00:15:13,080 --> 00:15:17,840 a significant increase in my lipid panel, triglycerides, 263 00:15:17,840 --> 00:15:20,400 cholesterol, sure. I was kind of expecting that 264 00:15:20,400 --> 00:15:24,200 since I had so much more fat coming in relative to my 265 00:15:24,200 --> 00:15:25,920 baseline. Now I am very deeply fat 266 00:15:25,920 --> 00:15:30,560 adapted, but I assumed with this much fat intake over baseline, I 267 00:15:30,560 --> 00:15:32,280 would see those numbers increase. 268 00:15:33,240 --> 00:15:38,840 But when I actually got the lab markers, I saw a very different 269 00:15:38,880 --> 00:15:41,400 outlook. So let's go to that lab results 270 00:15:41,400 --> 00:15:44,200 here, Greg, you're kind of in a cut right now. 271 00:15:44,280 --> 00:15:46,080 There's 4000 calories of pure fat. 272 00:15:47,040 --> 00:15:50,280 I would not complain about, that would be nice. 273 00:15:50,720 --> 00:15:54,000 All right, so look at these two panel these. 274 00:15:54,000 --> 00:15:58,120 This is basically when I got my first drone at 5:29 and then 275 00:15:58,120 --> 00:16:00,480 again on the last day of the experiment on 6/23. 276 00:16:00,960 --> 00:16:06,520 My total cholesterol went from 274 to 276, so not much of A 277 00:16:06,520 --> 00:16:10,440 change there. HDL cholesterol went from 91 to 278 00:16:10,520 --> 00:16:14,560 one O 6, so not a significant change there, but HDL actually 279 00:16:14,560 --> 00:16:19,880 improved. LDL went from 165 to 155 S LDL 280 00:16:20,040 --> 00:16:23,760 dropped. Triglycerides went from 77 to 281 00:16:23,760 --> 00:16:26,640 57, so I thought that was a little interesting. 282 00:16:27,880 --> 00:16:29,680 There's a whole bunch of markers here. 283 00:16:30,320 --> 00:16:36,120 HDL ratio went from 3 to 2.6. Triglyceride to HDL ratio went 284 00:16:36,120 --> 00:16:41,160 from .85 to .54. So pretty much for all intents 285 00:16:41,160 --> 00:16:43,800 and purposes an improvement in lipid markers. 286 00:16:43,800 --> 00:16:48,800 My APOB A1 ratio stayed steady at .53. 287 00:16:49,720 --> 00:16:52,600 Glucose is consistent 91 both times. 288 00:16:53,680 --> 00:16:57,800 Let me just Scroll down here. The main thing I want to talk 289 00:16:57,800 --> 00:17:00,880 about is the hormones 'cause this one really surprised. 290 00:17:00,960 --> 00:17:03,120 Me you were you were telling us about that. 291 00:17:04,000 --> 00:17:06,160 So see if I can Scroll down to find them. 292 00:17:07,000 --> 00:17:08,520 So just kind of give people some context. 293 00:17:08,520 --> 00:17:10,440 I've never had super high testosterone. 294 00:17:11,119 --> 00:17:13,680 That's why, Greg, one of the funny things people always 295 00:17:13,680 --> 00:17:16,400 accuse me of taking steroids. Or TRT or anything. 296 00:17:16,599 --> 00:17:19,160 Yeah, but like I get on my lab work and I think when I was at 297 00:17:19,160 --> 00:17:23,760 3.9% in my prep, I hit like 86 or 87 is total testosterone. 298 00:17:24,160 --> 00:17:27,880 So obviously not taking gear. But yeah, I've never been one to 299 00:17:27,880 --> 00:17:31,040 have super high testosterone. Typically I'm around like 4 to 300 00:17:31,040 --> 00:17:35,200 600 is pretty average for me, but when I go down to hormones, 301 00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:41,240 my total testosterone serum at the time of the experiment 302 00:17:41,240 --> 00:17:45,040 starting was 334 total testosterone, so not that great. 303 00:17:45,720 --> 00:17:48,800 After the experiment was over it more than doubled and went to 304 00:17:48,800 --> 00:17:50,960 696. That's crazy. 305 00:17:50,960 --> 00:17:54,840 So it literally more than doubled in that span while 306 00:17:54,840 --> 00:17:57,880 eating minimal protein and significantly high dietary fat. 307 00:17:58,840 --> 00:18:02,360 My sex hormone binding globulin did increase a little bit, so it 308 00:18:02,360 --> 00:18:05,280 went from 60 to 87. So that's not great. 309 00:18:05,680 --> 00:18:08,480 But if I could have found a way to unbind some of that 310 00:18:08,480 --> 00:18:10,520 testosterone, my free testosterone would be even 311 00:18:10,520 --> 00:18:13,800 higher. And then for some reason on 312 00:18:13,800 --> 00:18:17,120 Heads up Healthier, my free testosterone is not showing, but 313 00:18:17,120 --> 00:18:21,240 I have that as well. Let me sign in. 314 00:18:21,240 --> 00:18:22,520 I guess it must have logged me on. 315 00:18:23,480 --> 00:18:25,480 Say something, Greg. It's that's pretty wild. 316 00:18:27,440 --> 00:18:30,400 Were you expecting it to go in any certain direction or you 317 00:18:30,400 --> 00:18:32,680 kind of just open minded? Yeah, honestly didn't really 318 00:18:32,680 --> 00:18:36,440 expect any change in hormones, especially for such a short time 319 00:18:36,440 --> 00:18:39,720 span. But that's a. 320 00:18:39,760 --> 00:18:42,360 Pretty significant change too. That's just not like a 321 00:18:42,360 --> 00:18:45,200 questionable little bit of a variation that's a that's a 322 00:18:45,600 --> 00:18:51,520 notable amount. So here we've got IGF one and 323 00:18:51,520 --> 00:18:55,720 that went from, let's see here it's 81. 324 00:18:55,720 --> 00:19:03,360 Now if I look at overtime, so my IGF one went from one O 7 to 81. 325 00:19:03,360 --> 00:19:05,320 So that one actually dropped a little bit. 326 00:19:06,400 --> 00:19:12,400 Where's is the OK estradiolm that went from 8 to 22. 327 00:19:12,880 --> 00:19:17,560 So that one increased cortisol, interesting marker there. 328 00:19:17,640 --> 00:19:19,080 That one actually dropped a little bit. 329 00:19:19,080 --> 00:19:24,560 It went from 12.4 to 9.9 insulin. 330 00:19:24,840 --> 00:19:27,160 See, a lot of the reasons people are doing this is to improve 331 00:19:27,160 --> 00:19:28,520 insulin sensitivity. Sure. 332 00:19:29,160 --> 00:19:32,440 My insulin went from, that's all the back in May. 333 00:19:32,440 --> 00:19:35,320 I guess I didn't get insulin tested the first time, but it 334 00:19:35,320 --> 00:19:40,520 ended at 2.5 and then let's see here. 335 00:19:40,720 --> 00:19:42,320 Is your free test. Yeah, free test. 336 00:19:42,840 --> 00:19:45,320 All right, So my free testosterone, which is the one 337 00:19:45,320 --> 00:19:49,960 that really matters, went from, that's total free testosterone 338 00:19:49,960 --> 00:19:52,800 went from 27.8. So again, pretty low. 339 00:19:53,320 --> 00:19:57,840 And that also pretty much doubled and landed at 58.7 over 340 00:19:57,840 --> 00:19:59,840 the course of this experiment. So my total testosterone 341 00:19:59,840 --> 00:20:02,400 effectively doubled, my free testosterone effectively 342 00:20:02,400 --> 00:20:05,840 doubled, and all of my lipid markers improved while eating 343 00:20:05,880 --> 00:20:09,080 1000 extra calories, a ton of fat, a ton of fat, and less than 344 00:20:09,080 --> 00:20:10,800 9% of my calories coming from protein. 345 00:20:10,880 --> 00:20:13,400 No protein. So super interesting there. 346 00:20:14,160 --> 00:20:16,560 One of the graph here to kind of show a visual. 347 00:20:17,080 --> 00:20:24,000 This is my weight and calories graphed out in tandem from a 348 00:20:24,000 --> 00:20:27,240 heads up health standpoint. And again, you see all this 349 00:20:27,240 --> 00:20:29,080 volatility here. That was during that week 350 00:20:29,080 --> 00:20:31,240 period. It's dropping during that quote 351 00:20:31,240 --> 00:20:33,520 UN quote mini cut. And then over the course of the 352 00:20:33,520 --> 00:20:37,600 experiment, pretty much holding stable from a weight standpoint 353 00:20:37,600 --> 00:20:40,600 and actually starting to drop a little bit throughout it. 354 00:20:40,600 --> 00:20:46,640 So super interesting there. So what does all of this mean? 355 00:20:46,800 --> 00:20:48,520 This is kind of where it gets relevant for you, Greg. 356 00:20:48,520 --> 00:20:54,160 So what I'm thinking, first of all, everything that people are 357 00:20:54,160 --> 00:20:58,680 wanting to do with the sugar dying, I basically did with the 358 00:20:58,680 --> 00:21:04,240 opposite of the sugar dying. I showed that eating 1000 359 00:21:04,240 --> 00:21:08,600 calories more didn't result in an increase in body weight over 360 00:21:08,600 --> 00:21:10,880 that span. So had I kept calories 361 00:21:10,880 --> 00:21:13,680 consistent at 3000 of my baseline, I probably would have 362 00:21:13,680 --> 00:21:16,440 seen a significant drop in body weight, which is the main reason 363 00:21:16,440 --> 00:21:18,320 people are doing the sugar down. Like there's been poles down and 364 00:21:18,320 --> 00:21:20,320 most people are doing it to lose a lot of weight really quickly. 365 00:21:21,280 --> 00:21:24,280 So had I wanted to lose weight, I feel like I could have 366 00:21:24,280 --> 00:21:26,840 effectively done that with this experiment. 367 00:21:27,560 --> 00:21:33,120 Now, a couple other things to note is that doing it this way, 368 00:21:33,120 --> 00:21:38,640 as opposed to eating, you know, sweet tarts and apples and, you 369 00:21:38,640 --> 00:21:42,280 know, gummy worms, Sour Patch Kids, I'm eating real food the 370 00:21:42,280 --> 00:21:44,880 whole time. So from an instant sensitivity 371 00:21:44,880 --> 00:21:47,560 standpoint, I don't think there was any issues with what I had 372 00:21:47,560 --> 00:21:52,320 for my blood work and markers. Main thing is I just ate real 373 00:21:52,320 --> 00:21:54,320 food the whole time. Like I'm a huge nutrient eating 374 00:21:54,320 --> 00:21:55,920 real food, Yeah. You had nutrient dense. 375 00:21:56,400 --> 00:21:58,960 Choices, like I'm playing the long game with everything and 376 00:21:58,960 --> 00:22:01,240 like one of the big question marks that I have with the 377 00:22:01,240 --> 00:22:03,560 people doing the sugar dad is what are they going to do in 378 00:22:03,560 --> 00:22:05,760 another next five years? Like, are they going to be doing 379 00:22:05,760 --> 00:22:08,360 the same thing in five years or are they going to have too many 380 00:22:08,360 --> 00:22:10,200 cavities to be able to eat any food? 381 00:22:10,440 --> 00:22:13,400 And you know what, what are they going to do? 382 00:22:13,560 --> 00:22:15,080 Yeah. I think what's interesting is 383 00:22:15,080 --> 00:22:19,760 all the foods that you used to leverage the Super high fat 384 00:22:19,760 --> 00:22:25,200 intake are still the same foods you could eat today off this 385 00:22:25,200 --> 00:22:28,120 protocol. Whereas the sugar diet, people 386 00:22:28,120 --> 00:22:32,720 are leveraging candy in Twizzlers and high glycemic 387 00:22:32,720 --> 00:22:34,000 fruit juice and all that kind of stuff. 388 00:22:34,000 --> 00:22:37,360 When they stop the sugar diet, they probably aren't going to be 389 00:22:37,360 --> 00:22:40,080 consuming that. So like they're, they're going 390 00:22:40,080 --> 00:22:44,800 from whatever they're eating beforehand to just an insane 391 00:22:44,800 --> 00:22:48,760 amount of sugar in these food choices that are just serving 392 00:22:48,760 --> 00:22:52,400 them a temporary change, You know what I mean? 393 00:22:52,600 --> 00:22:55,080 Yeah, not great. But your food choices are the 394 00:22:55,080 --> 00:22:57,320 same, they're just elevated. Yeah. 395 00:22:58,720 --> 00:23:02,920 So in light of all this information, I think there's 396 00:23:02,920 --> 00:23:06,560 probably 2 use case scenarios that I think this could be 397 00:23:06,560 --> 00:23:10,600 really effective because like when you look at it on a big 398 00:23:10,600 --> 00:23:12,400 level, it's advocating pretty low protein. 399 00:23:12,400 --> 00:23:16,120 And I was consuming 4000 calories, 9% of that coming from 400 00:23:16,120 --> 00:23:19,800 protein, putting me at like 7585 grams of protein a day, which is 401 00:23:19,800 --> 00:23:21,360 not very much. That's definitely in stark 402 00:23:21,360 --> 00:23:24,960 contrast to them 1g of protein per pound of lean mass that you 403 00:23:24,960 --> 00:23:28,840 see throwing around a lot. Do I think, am I doing this to 404 00:23:28,840 --> 00:23:32,360 advocate people consume a ton of fat and hardly any protein? 405 00:23:32,360 --> 00:23:34,440 Not at all. I don't think that is optimal 406 00:23:34,560 --> 00:23:37,200 long term from a longevity standpoint, from health 407 00:23:37,200 --> 00:23:38,960 standpoint, from a muscle building and retention 408 00:23:38,960 --> 00:23:42,280 standpoint. But from a metabolic standpoint, 409 00:23:42,280 --> 00:23:46,360 I think this could be leveraged in a useful manner in both a 410 00:23:46,360 --> 00:23:48,720 building phase and a cutting phase. 411 00:23:48,720 --> 00:23:52,400 So from a building phase standpoint, you know, I'm 412 00:23:52,400 --> 00:23:54,160 looking at myself right now. I'm in a building phase. 413 00:23:54,160 --> 00:23:56,040 I like the idea of my testosterone doubling. 414 00:23:56,040 --> 00:23:58,320 That's pretty cool. I don't know if anybody that's 415 00:23:58,320 --> 00:24:01,960 doing the sugar diet tested hormones, but I would be 416 00:24:01,960 --> 00:24:05,400 doubtful that eating sweet tarts has resulted in a doubling of 417 00:24:05,400 --> 00:24:07,720 their testosterone. Maybe, maybe they can prove me 418 00:24:07,720 --> 00:24:10,880 wrong, but I'm highly unlikely of them. 419 00:24:11,800 --> 00:24:14,400 So in a building phase or anytime really, you want to 420 00:24:14,600 --> 00:24:16,960 optimize testosterone, especially as a natural athlete. 421 00:24:17,840 --> 00:24:21,960 So the fact that my testosterone literally doubled in this span, 422 00:24:22,440 --> 00:24:26,200 you know, I could leverage that, you know, intermittently, 423 00:24:26,280 --> 00:24:28,320 intermittently throughout a building phase to keep those 424 00:24:28,320 --> 00:24:33,640 levels higher at a baseline. So what I would like to do for 425 00:24:33,640 --> 00:24:37,080 myself is kind of treat this in a similar fashion to how I would 426 00:24:37,080 --> 00:24:40,360 and extended fast. I'm not an advocate for extended 427 00:24:40,360 --> 00:24:42,080 fasting to change body composition. 428 00:24:42,520 --> 00:24:45,680 I'm not an advocate of extended fasting while also being in a 429 00:24:45,680 --> 00:24:47,560 caloric deficits, too many stressors on the body. 430 00:24:47,920 --> 00:24:52,000 But when I'm eating at a surplus and I'm eating more protein on a 431 00:24:52,000 --> 00:24:55,160 day-to-day basis, I mean that is taxing on your digestive system 432 00:24:55,800 --> 00:24:58,480 and just eating a lot of foods taxing on your digestive system. 433 00:24:58,880 --> 00:25:01,960 So I'll, you know, throw in an extended fast on a quarterly or 434 00:25:02,200 --> 00:25:05,080 you know, by annually basis in a building phase. 435 00:25:05,320 --> 00:25:08,120 And I think I could treat this in a similar fashion. 436 00:25:08,120 --> 00:25:14,440 So once a quarter, probably do one week of this 4 to 1 ratio 437 00:25:15,440 --> 00:25:17,280 that's going to ramp up my metabolic rate. 438 00:25:18,120 --> 00:25:21,480 It's going to obviously effectively keep my testosterone 439 00:25:21,480 --> 00:25:24,640 functioning at a high rate and it'll be less protein coming in 440 00:25:24,640 --> 00:25:26,400 to give my digestive system a break. 441 00:25:26,640 --> 00:25:30,040 So on a quarterly basis, in the context of a build, I think a 442 00:25:30,080 --> 00:25:34,640 week of 4 to 1 lower protein, higher fat, and then either 443 00:25:34,640 --> 00:25:38,040 equal or slightly higher calories could be advantageous. 444 00:25:38,880 --> 00:25:41,720 And the other setting it would be beneficial, and we're going 445 00:25:41,720 --> 00:25:45,600 to experiment on this with you, is if you were in an extended 446 00:25:45,840 --> 00:25:49,000 cut, it's like my last cut was 33 weeks long. 447 00:25:49,200 --> 00:25:51,960 Your current cut is how many weeks are you in right now? 448 00:25:52,600 --> 00:25:53,760 Oh boy. Since January. 449 00:25:53,800 --> 00:25:55,320 Since January, so pretty good wow. 450 00:25:55,800 --> 00:25:58,320 And then depending on how your shows go, you may be competing 451 00:25:58,320 --> 00:26:00,840 until November. So that's like a whole year, 12 452 00:26:00,840 --> 00:26:02,800 months. That's a lot of a lot of weeks 453 00:26:02,800 --> 00:26:06,360 in a in a deficit. If you were just, you know, 454 00:26:06,640 --> 00:26:09,560 consistently drop intake throughout that whole span. 455 00:26:09,880 --> 00:26:11,440 You know, granted we're going to be doing refeeds. 456 00:26:11,440 --> 00:26:13,720 We have been doing refeeds with you, keto refeeds. 457 00:26:14,040 --> 00:26:17,360 That's still a long time in a deficit, which is going to 458 00:26:17,360 --> 00:26:21,120 inevitably result in a down play on your testosterone, your 459 00:26:21,120 --> 00:26:23,720 metabolic rates, energy levels, all that jazz. 460 00:26:24,200 --> 00:26:29,800 So if we could, if you're in an extended cut like that, offer a 461 00:26:30,000 --> 00:26:33,120 week where your calories are actually increased a little bit, 462 00:26:34,160 --> 00:26:36,840 your fat ratio is higher, your protein is a little bit lower, 463 00:26:37,120 --> 00:26:41,320 and that results in an uptick of testosterone or metabolic rate 464 00:26:41,560 --> 00:26:45,560 that would bode well for you elongating that cut even more in 465 00:26:45,560 --> 00:26:48,960 a healthy fashion. So just using you as an example, 466 00:26:48,960 --> 00:26:51,240 you're actually in peak week at the time of this recording. 467 00:26:52,440 --> 00:26:54,360 You've been in the cut since January. 468 00:26:55,040 --> 00:26:56,760 Your calories are pretty low right now. 469 00:26:56,760 --> 00:26:59,600 They're what do I have you? At this week, right around 1800. 470 00:26:59,800 --> 00:27:03,560 1800 calories. So after your show this weekend, 471 00:27:03,560 --> 00:27:05,600 you've got another 2 1/2 months before your next show. 472 00:27:06,160 --> 00:27:10,240 So what we'll probably do with you is next week post first 473 00:27:10,240 --> 00:27:17,040 show, we'll bump up your intake to maybe 2500 calories at this 4 474 00:27:17,040 --> 00:27:19,240 to 1 ratio. So it's going to be pretty low 475 00:27:19,240 --> 00:27:23,520 protein for you, but we'll only sustain it for a week and then 476 00:27:23,520 --> 00:27:26,120 we'll probably just do it for a week as opposed to two weeks. 477 00:27:26,440 --> 00:27:30,000 And that's in essence should increase your metabolic rate, 478 00:27:30,760 --> 00:27:32,960 probably give you a benefit testosterone wise. 479 00:27:33,280 --> 00:27:37,200 And then after that week is over, rather than dropping you 480 00:27:37,200 --> 00:27:41,000 back down to 1800 because of that increased metabolic rate, 481 00:27:41,000 --> 00:27:43,680 we may only be able to drop, you only need to drop you to like 482 00:27:43,960 --> 00:27:47,200 2200. So you'll effectively have, you 483 00:27:47,200 --> 00:27:51,560 know, 400 calories more runway going into the week following 484 00:27:51,560 --> 00:27:55,040 this high fat ratio then you would had we not done the high 485 00:27:55,040 --> 00:27:59,080 fat ratio so we can more healthfully continue your cut 486 00:27:59,760 --> 00:28:03,760 without any unnecessary downward trend in your metabolic rate or 487 00:28:03,920 --> 00:28:05,480 hormone levels. Sweet, I like it. 488 00:28:05,680 --> 00:28:08,240 So that's the plan. Essentially you're looking at, 489 00:28:08,480 --> 00:28:10,760 you know, if you're on one of the bottom couple rungs of a 490 00:28:10,760 --> 00:28:14,840 ladder, we're going to take a step back up one or two rungs so 491 00:28:14,840 --> 00:28:17,320 we have the rest of that ladder to come back down again. 492 00:28:17,440 --> 00:28:19,080 Yeah. And if we were to do the same 493 00:28:19,080 --> 00:28:22,000 thing calorically speaking, but at your current macro 494 00:28:22,000 --> 00:28:26,480 distribution, not have a similar effect to your hormones or you 495 00:28:26,480 --> 00:28:28,760 would likely risk putting on more weight. 496 00:28:29,000 --> 00:28:31,560 And we don't want to take one step forward and two steps back 497 00:28:31,560 --> 00:28:34,200 from a weight standpoint with you in a prep right now. 498 00:28:34,600 --> 00:28:37,960 But if we can give you an extra 400 calories as a baseline from 499 00:28:37,960 --> 00:28:41,320 which to continue the taper, increase your metabolic rates, 500 00:28:41,320 --> 00:28:45,760 increase your hormone levels, any that's going to be super 501 00:28:45,760 --> 00:28:48,360 positive for you in a extended prep. 502 00:28:48,640 --> 00:28:51,400 I don't think people that are doing like a shorter cut, like 503 00:28:51,400 --> 00:28:56,040 12 weeks or 16 weeks would benefit from this likely. 504 00:28:57,040 --> 00:29:00,320 But with you being in a, you know, practically year long cut, 505 00:29:00,400 --> 00:29:02,000 it makes a lot of sense. Yeah, I like it. 506 00:29:02,600 --> 00:29:04,240 So definitely. Rather try. 507 00:29:04,240 --> 00:29:08,000 This and see what this yields than just throwing a ton of 508 00:29:08,000 --> 00:29:09,840 cardio in there. Yeah, for sure. 509 00:29:10,600 --> 00:29:13,800 A couple other things to note apart from the data, just 510 00:29:14,560 --> 00:29:15,920 observations throughout doing it. 511 00:29:16,920 --> 00:29:19,280 I was eating an extra 1000 calories, but man, my hunger 512 00:29:19,440 --> 00:29:22,520 that first week especially really ramped up. 513 00:29:23,240 --> 00:29:26,920 I think it's because my food volume actually wasn't that high 514 00:29:27,680 --> 00:29:30,440 because when you're not eating much protein, you don't have 515 00:29:30,440 --> 00:29:32,240 very much food volume. I have the cauliflower rice to 516 00:29:32,240 --> 00:29:35,360 help soak up some of the fat that I was consuming, but 517 00:29:35,440 --> 00:29:37,920 actually a reduction in overall food volume. 518 00:29:39,040 --> 00:29:42,920 So hunger increased, which honestly kind of illustrated the 519 00:29:42,920 --> 00:29:44,800 increase in metabolic rate as well 'cause like when your 520 00:29:44,800 --> 00:29:46,680 metabolism is ramped up, your hunger increases. 521 00:29:47,680 --> 00:29:50,920 That seemed to subside after about a week and a half. 522 00:29:50,920 --> 00:29:53,760 And like my hunger seemed to stabilize after a week and 1/2, 523 00:29:54,080 --> 00:29:56,360 which leads me to believe that my metabolism started to 524 00:29:56,360 --> 00:29:58,720 stabilize as well. So I don't think there would 525 00:29:58,720 --> 00:30:02,520 have been a benefit to doing it any longer because I wanted to 526 00:30:02,520 --> 00:30:05,880 kind of benefit from that stocking of the metabolic 527 00:30:05,880 --> 00:30:09,640 flames, so to speak. So I don't think you'd want to 528 00:30:09,640 --> 00:30:11,520 do it for longer periods of time. 529 00:30:11,920 --> 00:30:15,320 And obviously throughout this experiment, my protein was low. 530 00:30:15,480 --> 00:30:18,920 So I people have pegged me as the high fat, low protein guy. 531 00:30:18,920 --> 00:30:21,400 I'm not that at all. Like I eat, I mean, like 532 00:30:21,400 --> 00:30:22,840 yesterday I had 200 grams of protein. 533 00:30:22,840 --> 00:30:24,680 Like I'm not low protein by any means. 534 00:30:25,440 --> 00:30:29,800 But one thing that I find funny is that people in the 535 00:30:29,800 --> 00:30:33,240 bodybuilding space for sure, but even in the keto space as well, 536 00:30:34,320 --> 00:30:37,680 they've always just kind of like left protein as a stand alone 537 00:30:37,840 --> 00:30:39,880 constant. They don't change it, whether 538 00:30:39,880 --> 00:30:41,200 their goal is to build or to cut. 539 00:30:41,200 --> 00:30:43,440 Like they leave protein pretty stable. 540 00:30:43,760 --> 00:30:46,920 They'll cut, you know, fat if the goal is to lose fat. 541 00:30:47,560 --> 00:30:49,960 They'll keep carbs low if they're doing a keto or a 542 00:30:49,960 --> 00:30:51,960 carnivore approach. But they've always been really 543 00:30:51,960 --> 00:30:55,240 protective of that protein. And from day one I've always 544 00:30:55,240 --> 00:30:59,760 said, hey look, you can get away with using protein as one of the 545 00:30:59,760 --> 00:31:03,120 levers you can manipulate if you do it in a healthy manner 546 00:31:03,440 --> 00:31:05,760 without any risk of loss of lean tissue. 547 00:31:06,520 --> 00:31:10,240 My first ketogenic prep in 2017, on the very tail end of it, I 548 00:31:10,240 --> 00:31:14,040 brought my protein all the way down to 65g, which I'm not 549 00:31:14,040 --> 00:31:16,320 advocating for, but I wanted to see how far I could push it 550 00:31:16,320 --> 00:31:20,000 without any loss of lean tissue. In the context of being very fat 551 00:31:20,000 --> 00:31:23,200 adapted, having higher circulating ketones, my strength 552 00:31:23,200 --> 00:31:25,920 markers held constant. I didn't lose any skeletal 553 00:31:25,920 --> 00:31:27,880 muscle tissue, even my protein that low. 554 00:31:27,880 --> 00:31:31,160 That's pretty wild. So I don't want people to hear 555 00:31:31,160 --> 00:31:33,720 this and say, OK, I'm I'm dropping protein to the floor, 556 00:31:33,880 --> 00:31:36,080 ramping fat up because you got to be strategic with it. 557 00:31:36,360 --> 00:31:40,400 But I do hope people recognize that you've got 3 levers to 558 00:31:40,400 --> 00:31:42,120 manipulate. And as far as nutrition goes, 559 00:31:42,120 --> 00:31:44,280 you get your fats, proteins and carbs. 560 00:31:44,520 --> 00:31:47,000 If you're doing keto or carnivore, you know your carbs 561 00:31:47,000 --> 00:31:49,320 are pretty much non existent. So that's not even a lever 562 00:31:49,320 --> 00:31:51,440 anymore. So then you got your fat and 563 00:31:51,440 --> 00:31:55,240 protein. Just simply manipulating fat is 564 00:31:55,240 --> 00:31:58,440 leaving 50% of the table, 50% on the table that you could 565 00:31:58,440 --> 00:32:02,080 leverage and benefit from. So this was insightful in that 566 00:32:02,080 --> 00:32:05,920 regard for sure. What else that what else did I 567 00:32:05,920 --> 00:32:07,160 say when I was going through this experiment? 568 00:32:07,160 --> 00:32:09,240 Anything else notable? I remember you saying you were. 569 00:32:09,240 --> 00:32:10,720 Hungry. Definitely hungry. 570 00:32:10,720 --> 00:32:11,200 You. You. 571 00:32:12,200 --> 00:32:13,840 You got to consume a little extra key to brick. 572 00:32:14,280 --> 00:32:16,040 Yeah, I was having. I think one day I had like two 573 00:32:16,040 --> 00:32:17,960 or three key to brick and that that's where some of the carbs 574 00:32:17,960 --> 00:32:19,760 were coming from too. There's just trace of carbs. 575 00:32:19,760 --> 00:32:21,800 In some of those, yeah. And like eggs. 576 00:32:21,800 --> 00:32:24,200 Trace carbs and heavy cream trace carbs. 577 00:32:24,200 --> 00:32:27,320 I was eating a lot of that SCT oil, which is really good. 578 00:32:27,560 --> 00:32:29,640 So it's a short chain triglyceride. 579 00:32:29,640 --> 00:32:32,360 I'm trying to remember the brand. 580 00:32:32,360 --> 00:32:35,200 It was like happy healthy or something like that. 581 00:32:35,680 --> 00:32:39,080 But it was super good and didn't mess with my gut at all. 582 00:32:39,080 --> 00:32:40,200 But I was putting that in my coffee. 583 00:32:40,200 --> 00:32:41,480 I was putting that on the bricks. 584 00:32:42,320 --> 00:32:43,880 So that short chain triglyceride. 585 00:32:44,560 --> 00:32:45,520 How was your? How was your? 586 00:32:45,520 --> 00:32:49,400 Mental acuity and stuff during that, it was good, it was good. 587 00:32:49,880 --> 00:32:52,640 I don't like feeling hungry. And again, I felt hungry that in 588 00:32:52,640 --> 00:32:57,560 the first week I felt a little tired in the morning. 589 00:32:57,560 --> 00:32:59,920 It took me, it seemed a little bit longer to get going. 590 00:33:00,800 --> 00:33:02,720 And I think that may have been because I was just eating so 591 00:33:02,720 --> 00:33:04,200 much food. It's almost like I had so much 592 00:33:04,200 --> 00:33:08,600 fuel coming in that kind of akin to like a motor. 593 00:33:09,360 --> 00:33:11,680 I was basically flooding it, so to speak, you know, flooding 594 00:33:11,680 --> 00:33:15,880 myself with so much fuel that I didn't need that much fuel. 595 00:33:16,160 --> 00:33:19,520 So I just kind of felt, I felt a little nausea in the beginning 596 00:33:19,520 --> 00:33:20,560 too. I think I just had so much 597 00:33:20,560 --> 00:33:23,760 energy coming into my system that it kind of backfired in 598 00:33:23,760 --> 00:33:26,200 that regard. But again, all that kind of 599 00:33:26,200 --> 00:33:28,360 levelled off after about a week and a half. 600 00:33:28,520 --> 00:33:30,840 And then I only had another half week before I, you know, called 601 00:33:30,840 --> 00:33:33,600 it quits on the experiment. But there was that that I 602 00:33:33,600 --> 00:33:36,960 noticed. But like all my strength markers 603 00:33:36,960 --> 00:33:38,360 were totally fine. Didn't see any reduction 604 00:33:38,360 --> 00:33:41,440 strength whatsoever. I was getting good pumps while 605 00:33:41,440 --> 00:33:44,520 training. All of my blood markers 606 00:33:44,520 --> 00:33:47,200 obviously improved, so no complaints there. 607 00:33:48,080 --> 00:33:50,920 I do. I didn't miss like a big old 608 00:33:50,920 --> 00:33:53,280 steak though, man, like I was. Yeah, you could do have much to 609 00:33:53,280 --> 00:33:54,640 chew. On yeah, I didn't have much to 610 00:33:54,640 --> 00:33:57,080 chew. On So from a texture standpoint, 611 00:33:57,080 --> 00:33:59,680 I was craving like, like when the experiment was over, like 612 00:33:59,680 --> 00:34:01,400 one of the first things I ate was a big old rotisserie 613 00:34:01,400 --> 00:34:02,680 chicken. I just want a whole bunch of 614 00:34:02,680 --> 00:34:07,560 protein and just chewing on some meat tissue, you know, but for 615 00:34:07,560 --> 00:34:10,239 like a week, which I think would probably be the ideal time to do 616 00:34:10,239 --> 00:34:12,480 this, you know, you can do anything for a week. 617 00:34:12,480 --> 00:34:15,920 And honestly, the cod liver, which is a great source of 618 00:34:15,920 --> 00:34:19,159 vitamin A and all kinds of other good stuff that cooked in with 619 00:34:19,239 --> 00:34:23,320 the cauliflower rice and a few scrambled eggs in there do 620 00:34:23,560 --> 00:34:25,360 tasty. And like, I mean, that's a 621 00:34:25,360 --> 00:34:28,639 pretty big bowl of food for like 300 grams cauliflower rice that 622 00:34:28,639 --> 00:34:30,920 was pretty filling. So that was good. 623 00:34:32,520 --> 00:34:34,440 So yeah, All in all, I think it was a success. 624 00:34:34,719 --> 00:34:40,520 I'm, I am curious to try and do the same thing at my my keeping 625 00:34:40,520 --> 00:34:42,679 the calories constant. So rather than it's like right 626 00:34:42,679 --> 00:34:44,760 now, I've been averaging about 3000 calories kind of back to 627 00:34:44,760 --> 00:34:47,360 baseline. I'll probably do this same 628 00:34:47,360 --> 00:34:52,000 experiment for a week and keep calories at 3000 just to see 629 00:34:52,000 --> 00:34:54,480 what happens. Compositionally speaking, that 630 00:34:54,480 --> 00:34:57,280 would mean my protein would be even lower to hit that 4 to 1 631 00:34:57,280 --> 00:35:02,280 ratio at a reduced intake. But for a week, I think that'd 632 00:35:02,280 --> 00:35:04,360 be totally sustainable and I'm curious to see what happens. 633 00:35:04,360 --> 00:35:07,720 Yeah, so track the data. Yeah, from a from. 634 00:35:07,720 --> 00:35:12,400 A title click baity standpoint, we could effectively say I 635 00:35:12,400 --> 00:35:17,360 naturally more than doubled my testosterone doing the opposite 636 00:35:17,640 --> 00:35:19,320 of the sugar diet. Sugar diet. 637 00:35:20,360 --> 00:35:22,840 So yeah, not throwing shade. I mean people do whatever they 638 00:35:22,840 --> 00:35:25,360 want to do. But this is insightful though. 639 00:35:25,640 --> 00:35:27,600 Yeah, I think this was. Insightful for me. 640 00:35:27,600 --> 00:35:30,680 I mean, it's kind of doing the same thing that we're doing with 641 00:35:30,680 --> 00:35:35,400 the ketogenic caloric refeeds in the context of your prep, but 642 00:35:35,400 --> 00:35:38,520 just kind of on the other end of the spectrum with an increase in 643 00:35:38,520 --> 00:35:43,680 calories over baseline as opposed to a increase in macros 644 00:35:43,680 --> 00:35:45,440 acutely in the context of the deficit. 645 00:35:47,240 --> 00:35:48,640 So yeah, I mean, it makes total sense. 646 00:35:50,080 --> 00:35:53,680 I didn't get like FGF 21 plasma tested, so I'd be curious to 647 00:35:53,680 --> 00:35:56,600 know what that level was pre and post. 648 00:35:57,720 --> 00:36:00,880 But I was super pleased with all the hormone markers and lipid 649 00:36:00,880 --> 00:36:03,640 panel and I think this will probably be something that I 650 00:36:03,640 --> 00:36:07,440 throw into the mix similar to my extended fast on a somewhat 651 00:36:07,440 --> 00:36:09,000 quarterly basis or something like that. 652 00:36:09,040 --> 00:36:10,360 Cool. And in the context of a prep 653 00:36:10,520 --> 00:36:12,920 another tool in the toolbox. Another tool in the toolbox. 654 00:36:12,920 --> 00:36:15,120 So appreciate you all for tuning in. 655 00:36:15,120 --> 00:36:19,440 Appreciate you, Greg, for being my sidekick here with pleasure. 656 00:36:19,680 --> 00:36:23,280 And we'll we'll do we'll do this for you in the prep. 657 00:36:23,280 --> 00:36:25,640 You'll be the Guinea pig in the context of a deficit. 658 00:36:26,000 --> 00:36:30,160 And we'll do a follow up work podcast for sure, kind of diving 659 00:36:30,160 --> 00:36:31,840 into some of the results there. So sweet. 660 00:36:32,120 --> 00:36:33,240 I'm excited. Let's be cool. 661 00:36:33,400 --> 00:36:37,640 Yes, indeed, till. Next time y'all stay savage and 662 00:36:37,640 --> 00:36:39,400 always be experimenting ta ta.