The interesting thing about reading the responses to The Case Against Soft Drinks, was the number of people who admitted “Well, I don’t drink that mess… I drink diet soda!”

And just then, the record (or CD …or MP3) skipped.

I get it. People who believe that the primary concern is calories… will drink a diet pop because the calorie count is low. (In fact, in some cases, it’s literally zero calories.) But clean eaters know better. Clean eaters know a few things about this mentality:

First, if you’re going to enjoy a zero calorie drink, it had better be water.

Secondly, a drink that has color and sweet sugary taste, but zero calories? That’s a highly processed product. No bueno.

Next, if it has no vitamins or minerals in it, it’s not worth my time ingesting it. Getting the most bang for our nutritional buck, here.

Lastly, if it has high fruc–

Uh, not so fast, Erika! Diet soft drinks don’t have high fructose corn syrup in them!

No, you’re absolutely right. It doesn’t have HFCS in it. It has aspartame in it. Ooooh, that’s so much better.

I’m not even going to go in on this. Someone already did:

“When aspartame was put before the FDA for approval, it was denied eight times. G.D. Searle, founder of aspartame, tried to get FDA approval in 1973. Clearly, he wasn’t bothered by reports from neuroscientist Dr. John Olney and researcher Ann Reynolds (hired by Searle himself) that aspartame was dangerous. Dr. Martha Freeman, a scientist from the FDA division of Metabolic and Endocrine Drug Products, declared, “The information submitted for review is inadequate to permit a scientific evaluation of clinical safety.” Freeman recommended that until the safety of aspartame was proven, marketing the product should not be permitted. Alas, her recommendations were ignored. Somehow, in 1974, Searle got approval to use aspartame in dry foods. However, it wasn’t smooth sailing from there. In 1975, the FDA put together a task force to review Searle’s testing methods. Task force team leader Phillip Brodsky said he “had never seen anything as bad as Searle’s testing” and called the test’s results “manipulated.” Before aspartame actually made it into dry foods, Olney and attorney and consumer advocate Jim Turner filed objections against the approval.

“In 1977, the FDA asked the U.S. attorney’s office to start grand jury proceedings against Searle for “knowingly misrepresenting findings and concealing material facts and making false statements in aspartame safety tests.” Shortly after, the U.S. attorney leading the investigation against Searle was offered a job by the law firm that was representing Searle. Later that same year, he resigned as U.S. attorney and withdrew from the case, delaying the grand jury’s investigation. This caused the statute of limitations on the charges to run out, and the investigation was dropped. And he accepted the job with Searle’s law firm. Stunning.

“In 1980, a review by the Public Board of Inquiry set up by the FDA determined that aspartame should not be approved. The board said it had not been presented with proof of reasonable certainty that aspartame is safe for use as a food additive.” In 1981, new FDA Commissioner Arthur Hull Hayes was appointed. Despite the fact that three out of six scientists advised against approval, Hayes decided to overrule the scientific review panel and allow aspartame into limited dry goods. In 1983, he got it approved for beverages, even though the National Soft Drink Association urged the FDA to delay approval until further testing could be done. That same year, Hayes left the FDA amid charges of impropriety. The Internal Department of Health and Human services was investigating Hayes for accepting gratuities from FDA-regulated companies. He went to work as a consultant for Searle’s public relations firm. Interesting. The FDA finally urged Congress to prosecute Searle for giving the government false or incomplete test results on aspartame. However, the two government attorneys assigned to the case decided not to prosecute. Later, they went to work for the law firm that represented Searle. Fascinating. Despite recognizing ninety-two different symptoms that result from ingesting aspartame, the FDA approved it for use, without restriction in 1996. Brilliant.

[...]

“Nutrasweet and Equal contain aspartame. When ingested, one of aspartame’s ingredients, methyl alcohol, converts into formaldehyde, a deadly neurotoxin. In addition to aspartame, Equal contains the amino acid phenylalanine. Phenylalanine occurs naturally in the brain. But high levels can increase the chance of seizures and lead to depression and schizophrenia. There is no lesser of the two evils. NutraSweet and Equal are both evil. Sweet and Low is no saint, either. It is an artificial sweetener that contains saccharin, a coal-tar compound.” [source]

I’m going to focus on three major issues, here.

For starters, this should lay to rest that philosophy of “If it were so bad for you, then the FDA wouldn’t have approved it.” The amount of trust we give our government officials would make sense if those positions weren’t held by people with their own humanity to contend with. Look at the instances of people who were bought off, paid off, pushed aside, ignored all to get this product approved.

Secondly, I’m a huge advocate of knowing what you’re eating – both the positive and negative information – before you eat it. If you didn’t know all of this about aspartame before you decided to make it a staple in your diet, is it time to reassess whether or not it belongs in your diet?

Thirdly, this is the issue with processed foods. They make use of chemicals used for other purposes in nature in order to create flavors and tastes in a fashion that would be much more costly if the actual foods themselves were used to make the product! You are introducing chemicals into your system… period.

“[Aspartame is a low-calorie sweetener made by joining two amino acids with an alcohol. It is approximately 180 times sweeter than sugar.] Some researchers claim to have linked aspartame to brain tumors and lymphoma, but the FDA insists that the sweetener is safe for humans. A list of complaints submitted to the Department of Health and Human Services includes headaches, dizziness, diarrhea, memory loss and mood changes. The Center for Science in the Public Interest states that children should avoid drinks sweetened with aspartame.” [source]

Think about it – a chemical was created to cause the brain to react to it in the same way as sugar. Many people – many people - claim they experience withdrawals when they take a break from products containing aspartame. The only other instance I can think of where a person is willfully introducing a mind-altering chemical into their system… definitely causes withdrawal symptoms when people break from it. I’m sure you’re familiar with heroin… cocaine… meth… I could go on, but I’m sure you get the point.

And since I’m ticking everyone off? Let’s talk about Splenda.

Knowing what we know about the 40-some-odd years of aspartame’s existence, splenda (made of sucralose), has an equally young past. One more quote:

Because we’re having so much fun, lets bash the shit out of Splenda, one of the newer sweeteners. Splenda is made by chlorinated sugar, changing its molecular structure. The finished product is called sucralose. The makers of this poison tout its lack of calories and claim it’s safe for diabetics. The FDA calls sucralose 98 percent pure. The other 2 percent contains small amounts of heavy metals, methanol, and arsenic. Well gee, at least it doesn’t have any calories. So what if it has a little arsenic? Sucralose has been found to cause diarrhea; organ, genetic, immune system, and reproductive damage; swelling of the liver and kidneys: and a decrease in fetal body weight. What a splendid product! [source]

Really, I’m over it. All those little diet dishes that are “sweet” thanks to this stuff? I’m over those, too. I have a family history of cancer… what do I look like putting known cancer-causing agents (also known as carcinogens) in my body? No thanks.

These sweeteners are not food. They are chemicals meant to trick your body into thinking they are something they aren’t. I don’t know how many different times, in how many different ways I can say this, but it goes as follows:

I don’t care how many miles you run each day, how many pounds of weight you lift or how chiseled your muscles are. You cannot live a fully healthy life if you ingest chemicals to survive. You are cheating your insides – screw what you look like on the outside – if you don’t care for them as much as you care for your abs, your booty, your legs or whatever else you adore. Period.

Believe it or not, I don’t share this stuff with the intention of telling anyone to give it up. We all (hopefully) have reasons for making the decisions we make. My point in sharing this information is so that we can, again, make educated decisions about the food choices we make. Clean eating is simple. Easy. The foods are of the Earth, I’m of the Earth, this is a win. When we introduce outside substances to our diet, our bodies deserve the twenty minutes it might take to hit up your favorite wellness-promoting website and do a search. It’s seriously not that hard.

I will say this, though: I’m a firm believer in the philosophy that says “those who know better, constantly strive to do better.” Just a thought.

Many thanks to everyone who waited patiently during the server outage. My apologies to those who subscribe via e-mail, who’ll be receiving the Q&A a day late.

Got some questions today about exercise, snacking and, well… weight loss.

Moderation: You're Doin' It Wrong

Q: What’s the quickest and safest way to lose weight?

This one is probably a whole post in itself… but there is no quick way. No matter how many pills, programs, and ad campaigns tell you otherwise… there is no quick way. In fact, the quicker the method, the more likely it can kill you. The more likely you will gain it back. The more likely it won’t work at all, and when you complain about it? They’ll just tell you “Ur doin it rongz.”

Trust me on this one. Weight loss through a quick, easy and “effortless” method has something like a 90% chance of coming back. The quickest way to healthy, long-lasting health and weight loss is through addressing what brought you the problem in the first place: your eating habits and your activity levels.

Q: Can you give leg workout exercises for those of us who are considered “pear shaped”? In the past, my thighs became bigger when performing lower body workouts. I’ve been told to lift heavy weights in order to fatigued the muscles. Thanks!

Well, first, let’s talk about why your thighs became bigger with your lower body workouts. Weight lifting/strength training builds muscle. You put your body through stress (the actual exercise); your body, in return, responds by building muscle to help make that exercise easier. So, you develop muscle that will help make this regular rigorous exercise easier for your body to handle. (Your body is extremely efficient at making things easier… it likes easy. Note that this is sometimes a problem!)

So, yes. Your legs would grow larger with the workout. The problem with this is that for those of us who are trying to tone up and tighten up a figure, we don’t want things to get bigger. We want them smaller!

If you want to go smaller, conventional wisdom says to slow down on the strength training. Not stop, slow down. Use that time and energy and put it into a more rigorous cardio workout. If there are no other issues with your diet or your overall health, I think you’ll slowly, but surely, see the progress you’re looking for.

Q: Can you give us a few quick snacks for late night hungries?

Hmm… snacks, you say?

I keep grapes in the freezer. They’re harder/take longer to chew, light in calories and actually taste pretty good. I also keep peanut butter pretzels in the pantry (divided up by portion, mind you) so that I can give myself a little something after my workouts that won’t interfere with my sleep. I also make little sandwiches – a slice of bread folded in half with peanut butter, or my strawberry preserves that I’ve made. Those work well, also. Shoot, you could also give yourself a couple cuts of meat, some honey mustard and a slice of bread, too. My all time favorite, though, is a glass of water and a shower. That’s not sarcasm, either. Usually by the end of both, I’m no longer hungry. If I am, then I hit one of the options above.

Q: For weight loss-is more cardio better? How much cardio daily is recommended for weight loss?

Aerobic exercise – also known as cardio – is a great way to burn calories, but the best thing for weight loss is addressing your eating habits. If you don’t put “it” in your mouth, you don’t have to burn “it” off!

As for how much, go until you feel like you can’t go anymore. If that’s five minutes, that’s fine – because then you’ll know that next time… you need to try for six!

Keep those questions coming, and I’ll have ‘em ready for next week! Have thoughts? Let me hear ‘em in the comments!

When it comes to philosophies on food, there’s no shortage of people out there ready to share their thoughts on what you should be eating and when. I’m always a little careful with who’s philosophy I follow because you never know why they’re pushing what they’re pushing.. and the more popular they are, the more questionable their choices. At least, that’s how I see it.

On the Facebook fan page, someone asked for my thoughts on the “6 meal plan” offered up by Dr. Oz.. who I kinda have a little crush on, but who doesn’t? The details are pasted below:

Mini-meal #1: Protein

You can choose from a variety of food choices, but your first meal must be a protein. Healthy options include:

• Greek yogurt
• Lean meats
• Fish
• Nuts
• Beans

Mini-meal #2: Healthy Fats

Again, there is flexibility in the kind of healthy fat you can have, but keep the food in the same category. Options include:

• Canned salmon (which contains Omega-3s)
• Walnuts
• Avocados
• Olives
• Sunflower/pumpkin/flax seeds

Mini-meal #3: Whole Grains

• Whole-wheat bagel with low-fat cream cheese
• Brown rice
• Oatmeal
• Popcorn
• Whole-wheat bread, pasta or crackers
• Wild rice

Mini-meal #4: Fiber

• Grains and whole-grain products
• Fruits
• Vegetables
• Beans, peas and other legumes
• Nuts and seeds

Mini-meal #5: Metabolism Booster

Salad with hot green peppers

Mini-meal #6: Healthy Sweets

Dark chocolate

To ensure that you experience at least SOME kind of weight loss, you’re encouraged to take at least 10,000 steps each day (counted by a pedometer), as well as taking a few vitamins. What are my thoughts?

Hmmm… I mean, to me, I think it’s almost too compartmentalized to be appropriate for every lifestyle. Someone who has to do a lot of business meetings for lunch might find it difficult to stick to a strictly whole-grain lunch. I think it’s an awesome challenge and would be valuable for anyone to jump on it, simply because getting used to having these things in your daily diet is a great thing to have. However… would someone get so frustrated by the limitations that they’d quit altogether? That’s an interesting question, to me.

The question of whether or not one could remain full off of an eating plan like this was posed to me.. and I’ve got to tell you.

YES!

I eat six times a day! I have a short breakfast, a quick brunch, lunch, a snack, dinner, then a last quick bite. I am never hungry. My tummy doesn’t even rumble any more because it knows that food is coming. Because my stomach doesn’t rumble anymore, I no longer eat (or overeat) based off of hunger. I’m no longer forced to stuff myself until that “hungry” feeling goes away.

So, in short… I don’t think the Six-Meal Plan is for beginners to the “healthier lifestyle” movement. I think it’s almost too radical and different to encourage long-lasting changes. I DO think the way it allows the dieter to really focus on specific food groups is an awesome way to get in the habit of making sure we’re getting the good stuff everyday. I love the six times a day eating schedule, and do recommend it for everyone.

What do you think? Opting to give the plan a try?

Earlier, I asked for a callout of the craziest diets you’ve ever heard of, and I got some pretty awesome responses:

The Cabbage Diet. The Grapefruit Diet. The Cookie Diet. The Cereal Diet. The Mayo Clinic Diet. The Tea Diet. The Seaweed and Coral Diet (better known as The Spongebob Diet… I just made it up, but I bet I could make some money off of it, huh?)

Now, after my post on the Drive-Thru Diet, I’d like to think that my attitude on diets is relatively clear – I strongly believe they’re a band-aid on a bullet wound. They don’t address the core issue (getting the bullet out), they don’t prevent the problem from getting worse (as in, an infection), and they don’t really help you get better… they just help you stop looking at the problem, really.

However, I do realize that because you can get immediate results, it’s easy to opt for a diet. A little discomfort but minimal effort, no need for exercise, quick and easy weight loss. It seems pretty ideal, I guess. We’re just always dumbfounded when the weight manages to pile itself back on. Dumbfounded, and heavier.

So let’s break down the anatomy of the quick weight loss diet, shall we?

What is a diet?

A diet, in general terms, is simply the “list” of foods that you allow yourself to eat during the day. It’s the foods that you limit yourself to – if you were on the cabbage diet, your daily diet consists of boiled cabbage for breakfast and lunch with a regular dinner. Diets are generally named by the food that dominates your day – cereal diet, cookie diet, mashed potato diet. This all seems kind of “duh,” but we’re breaking it down to it’s very core, right? Gotta start somewhere.

Why is dieting so popular?

Dieting is popular because the notion, quite frankly, is that it works. Limiting yourself to only one food that you KNOW you enjoy, eating it all day every day, and losing weight while you’re at it? It’s a painless way to take care of a problem that already makes us uncomfortable to address or even discuss. Not only that, but in some circles, it’s considered common practice and even “trendy” to be on the current “popular” diet.

Taking it a step further, there is money to be made off of pushing diets. The Mayo Clinic Diet required you to purchase a book. All information about the Cookie Diet led to a website that required you to purchase (and, essentially, live off of) one particular brand of cookie. Most diets that tend to gain media steam behind them do so because someone’s pushing it. Why? You have to invest money to make money.. so pay for the diet to get a little exposure, watch that exposure bring you a lot more money.

Why does dieting work?

Dieting works because it is an extremely mindless form of calorie counting. If I’ve only allowed myself to choose from this one low-calorie food to eat, I can’t possibly gain weight, right? You don’t have to think about the food you’re eating and whether or not it’ll cause you to gain weight – you KNOW this one food won’t cause you to put on any pounds, you know exactly what you’re going to do. It’s auto-pilot for weight loss.

However – because it usually involves something that you can only manage temporarily, you tend to come off of it – excited to beat the pounds – by celebrating with what? More food you have no business indulging in in the first place!

Why does the weight ALWAYS come back?

Because… wait for it… auto-pilot doesn’t work for weight loss! That’s right – you can’t do it. Why? Because waking up one day and deciding that you’re going to go auto-pilot eating nothing but grapefruit for breakfast and lunch can’t change the fact that your auto-pilot used to lead you to McDonalds or Krispy Kreme for breakfast every morning. Auto-pilot, unfortunately, does equate to mindlessness. It’s operating without thinking. “Not thinking” before led us to being unhealthy in the first place. It certainly won’t lead us to “healthy,” and if it does, it certainly wouldn’t do it overnight… or in two-six weeks like other diets.

Without a relatively rare medical condition, you cannot put the weight on if you aren’t putting harmful things in your mouth. It simply does not work that way. Dieting might help you drop a few pounds, but if your eating habits are in check you couldn’t put it on in the first place… and you couldn’t run the risk of gaining it back once you “come off” of your diet. It solves the immediate visual problem – if only momentarily- however you’re not addressing the thing that not only ensures that you’ll always have the weight, but in some cases also ensures that you’re doing some damage to your insides, as well.

How can I successfully lose weight?

You have to look at your lifestyle and gauge what you’re doing that is causing you to keep the weight on. Addressing that will not only cause the weight you’ve put on to fall off, but it will prevent the weight from returning. Sure, you can exercise to help keep it off, but thepurpose of exercise is to preserve your body’s range of motion. Weight loss is only an additional benefit to it.

The best way to protect and preserve our bodies is to be conscious of what we’re putting into it. Although it should be a recurring theme by now, a lifetime of bad habits cannot be corrected or rectified by one to six weeks of sacrifice. When you can be real and honest with yourself about the problem, then you can be real and honest with yourself about a practical long-term solution. And that includes, bypassing the trendy fad diets!

Are you a serial dieter? Have you had success with a diet? Share your stories below – I’d love to hear ‘em!

As someone who works in marketing, I’m often analyzing something from the aspect of the company. Why would a company pay to put “this-particular-image” in my face? What are they trying to get me to do? Why does my reaction benefit them? Is it truly in my best interests to react to this in this particular fashion?

Let’s use that to discuss Taco Bell’s latest swindle, the “Drive Thru Diet.”

Now, after you’ve watched that, before I can even break this down to you, Taco Bell already gets it poppin’ in the fine print:

Drive-Thru-Diet® is not a weight-loss program. For a healthier lifestyle, pay attention to total calorie and fat intake and regular exercise. Taco Bell’s Fresco Menu can help with calorie reductions of 20 to 100 per item compared to corresponding products on our regular menu. Not a low calorie food. For complete nutritional information please visit TacoBell.com

Oh, my heart.

See, to explain this briefly, the Drive-Thru Diet isn’t quite a diet in the same sense that Americans understand the term “diet.” To many of us, diet implies words like “temporary, quick, short-lived.” It leans more toward the understanding of “The Cabbage diet.” “The Lemonade Diet.” “The Cookie Diet.” Not as in “My regular daily diet consists of..” because that’s not what we’re all used to hearing. So when we hear “The Drive-Thru Diet,” it sounds more like “Oh, you mean I can eat cookies for breakfast and lunch and a regular dinner and still lose weight?” except replacing “cookies” with “Taco Bell.”

If you notice, the commercial says “Her experience is based on a 1,250 calorie per day diet.” Let me tell you – you can do a 1,250 calorie diet without Taco Bell. Actually, you can do it without ANY fast food. Is anyone going to tell you that, though? Of course not. Jenny Craig, Weight Watchers, Slim Fast, Nutrisystem, Subway, and now Taco Bell… they’re all going to tell you, “Use this system, but I’m not going to tell you how to make this system work on your own without me.. because that would be money I couldn’t make off of you.” (Those of you who stick fast to those systems, this isn’t a knock at you. No need to defend them in the comments.)

So let’s look closer at the questions I asked in the beginning. Right now, we’re all making New Year’s Resolutions to be healthier. To eat better. To cut out the junk food. To spend less money at fast food restaurants. Wait — spend less money at fast food joints?! This will not do!

Enter Taco Bell’s marketing team… searhing for a way to improve upon Subway’s “Jared” phenom. You know, the fella that lost a ton of weight eating Subway sandwiches instead of actual home-cooked meals… only to gain it back in late ‘09? Yeah, that one. They come up with Christine. Actually, Christine in a bikini with a gut, then Christine in a bikini hiding in some grass, then Christine in a slinky dress, and NOW we get Christine in the pants. Why is Taco Bell paying to put this particular image in my face?

Are they trying to calm my fears about Taco Bell getting in the way of me achieving my weight loss goals for my resolution? (Especially since the site asks me to “Make a Frescolution” and all.) Are they trying to convince me that I can still eat healthily even though I’m getting fast food?

What are they trying to get me to do? I’m a person who would love to eat better in the new year and cut out junk/fast food, but am not sure of how to go about it. Would this commercial convince me to stick with what I’ve been doing, so long as I order “something else?”

Why does my reaction benefit them? Here’s why: Studies show that if I can get you at least in the drive thru lane, I’ve already got your money. Guess what else – I can also convince you to ignore the “healthy menu” and get what you’ve always gotten. Why? Because of habit! If you’ve always crept in that drive-thru lane and bought the same big giant nacho order, how easy do you think it’s going to be to get you in the lane, anyway? That “healthy menu” isn’t what’s on your mind when you pull in, anyway. If I can give you a reason to come back? I can keep you from resolving to stay away entirely, and then I can eventually convince you to stick around. Take a look at that menu – the “healthy” options aren’t the largest photos on the drive-thru menu. That’s for a reason.

Is it truly in my best interests to react to this in this particular fashion? Let me rephrase that for you – is it in your best interest to believe that a healthy diet (as in, the foods you eat regularly) consists of regular ingestion of Taco Bell? Especially when it says on the page, “For a healthier lifestyle, pay attention to total calorie and fat intake and regular exercise. Fresco can help with calorie reductions of 20 to 100 per item compared to corresponding products on our regular menu. Not a low calorie food?” They tell you basically everything you need to know to lose the weight without them, but they tack information onto it about how you can execute this with Taco Bell!

To put it mildly, the message that the viewer receives is “I can lose weight with this ‘Drive-Thru’ Diet.” Never mind the fact that she, apparently, lost the 54lbs over 2yrs – approx 27lbs per year – since she “…didn’t want to give up her fast food.” Is that kind of mentality one worth maintaining? I don’t think so. Personally, I believe it’s in one’s best interests to eat as far away from franchises as possible, but that’s me.

In closing (since I can’t say “In short,” ’cause this is anything BUT short), this is beyond stupid. It plays upon the insecurities of the consumer and treats them like marks, ready for the swindle – “You want to lose weight and not give up your fast food? We still gotcha back! Check out these tacos with no cheese or sauce!” – all while avoiding any claims of misrepresentation… because they told you to calorie count. They also told you these are not low-calorie foods, so take them at their word. Do your best to avoid it, and your body will thank you with more than 54lbs lost… and you’ll lose it in less than two years.

What are your thoughts about this? Have you seen the commercials? What did you think?

We all do it: We wake up in the morning, rush toward the shower, grab our toothbrush on the way out, put on some clothes, do a little personal grooming, and rush out the door. Anyone see the problem here?

I do. What happened to breakfast?

Why do we do this to ourselves? Because we know that we’ll be alright if we only get something else a little later on instead of now? Are we even properly gauging what we can actually handle?

Here’s the skinny: It’s called breakfast because you’re breaking the fast that you endure when sleeping. You fast during sleep, you wake up, you eat! If you wait until lunch time.. what happens? You’re starving, and likely to order to first 1,300 calorie burger you can get your mitts on and pow! Overeating again!

Is it an issue of time? If so, here’s a suggestion. Grab a waffle or two. Cut up some fruit in ziploc bags, and grab one in the morning as you prepare your shower or get your thoughts together for the day.

No matter how many times you hear your friends say otherwise, skipping breakfast isn’t saving you calories in the slightest. They eventually wind up overcompensating for the calories lost at breakfast, because the body is much more hungry than it would’ve been at breakfast. It’s not beneficial to your weight loss efforts at all!

It could be as complex as a salsa omelette, or as simple as a half of a grapefruit sliced in fourths. The important thing here is to nourish your body in the morning, so that you’re not eating to make up for 14-16 hours of starvation at lunch time. Your tummy will thank you for it!