As part of my work at the University of Guelph, I'm part of a team that is designing a sports drink for active women.
If you are a women who has an interest in sports drinks, and feel like volunteering less then a minute of your time to help a group of grad students, then please check out the following survey:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=542233220255
Thanks for your help!
BP
I apologize for the lack of posts; it's been a very busy 2007 so far.
For me, 2007 has been the year of meetings. It's been one after the other for almost all of January. Usually, they involve a good amount of food, and a lot of conversation about nutrition and the food industry.
In fact, I just finished a meeting today where I had one of those "hmmmmm" moments.
You see, it dawned on me while discussing the latest dieting trends that we have done a great job of creating an "industry" out of weight loss. And, by "we" I don't mean some evil corporate conspiracy or some secret group of executives. I mean you, me, and everyone else who make up the buying public.
Somehow, we've convinced ourselves that in order to lose weight, eating less is not the answer. Instead, we've decided that the key to losing weight is eating foods that make us lose weight.
It's as though we are addicted to buying. To purchasing and consuming. In general we have a hard time excepting that "taking away" is the answer. We would much rather "add".
Sure, this keeps us as good little consumers and keeps the economy going, but a quick look at the stats reveals that it certainly doesn’t make us any leaner. In fact, the opposite is happening. We keep consuming and, as a population, we keep getting bigger.
So here is my solution - Instead of worrying about which green tea to buy, and what specific type of grapefruit you are going to eat, which diet you are going to follow, and which fast food is "healthiest", make a rule that outside of the grocery store, you will not pay for food. I don't mean steal. I just mean don't buy anything extra that day.
We already know that just because you are hungry, it doesn’t mean your metabolism is slowing down, or that you are breaking down muscle (Unless you haven’t eaten in over 3 days!). For the most part, it simply means you are used to eating at that time.
So forgo the snacks in the car, and the coffee stop on the way into work. I’m sure that if you can avoid buying any extra food for an entire month, you will see significant weight loss. Despite all the gimmicks and trends, simply eating less is still the best, most effective answer.
Give it a try, but take a positive approach. Go into this experiment thinking that you do not need to buy extra food. That you will not feel bad, or sluggish. That it will not affect your workouts or your stress level. Stay positive, and avoid purchasing anything other than your groceries.
BP
Before I get started let me just say that this was by far the most difficult research project I have done to date.
The amount of misinformation, conflicting results, and misinterpreted data out there on this topic is amazing.
For this reason, I have had to break this topic up into three different parts
PART I
The thermic effect of food is the energy your body requires to digest, absorb and dispose of the nutrients that you eat. It is often abbreviated as TEF and is usually sited by diet gurus and fitness experts as the reasons why you should or shouldn’t eat a certain way.
Through a quick scan of the internet, I found the following claims:
So it would make sense that eating multiple small high-protein meals would be the best way to increase your metabolism.
While this theory sounds great, let’s look at what the research has found…
Firstly, the one thing that all the papers I read agreed upon was that the number one factor that affects your TEF is the total amount of calories you eat.
Researchers have calculated TEF to be roughly 10% of your caloric intake.
Therefore, if you eat 1,000 Calories, you raise your metabolism by about 100 Calories and if you eat 10,000 Calories, you will raise your metabolism by about 1,000 Calories.
The majority of the thermic effect occurs in the first hour after eating, but depending on the size of the meal the effect can last from anywhere between 5 and 24 hours. It seems that the thermic effect will last until all the calories from your meals have been metabolized.
This leads us to the theory of eating frequent small meals.
From what I can tell, the idea that food frequency affects the amount of calories you burn is very debatable.
A few papers have found that eating one large meal has a higher thermic effect then many small meals. And a few papers have found that eating several small meals has a larger effect then one large meal. The rest have found no difference.
And to me, this makes the most sense.
If you eat 2,000 Calories, you will have to burn about 200 calories just digesting, absorbing and disposing of the nutrients you have eaten.
It does not matter whether you ate all 2,000 Calories at once, or spread them out through multiple small 500 Calorie meals. The total volume of calories remains the same and therefore so does their effect on your metabolism.
So far, the Thermic effect of food can be best summed up as –
“Eating increases your metabolism”
For the average person, eating around 2,500 Calories a day, the Thermic Effect of Food will increase your metabolism by between 200-300 Calories.
Here’s the kicker - If total calorie content is the best predictor of your TEF, it’s not as if you are going to eat an extra 5000 calories so you can burn an extra 500!
Luckily, there still may be ways to affect your metabolism through the foods you eat. In Part II I will break down the effect the different macronutrients have on your metabolism.
BP
Here is a link to a very interesting movie on the history and politics behind Aspartame.
I will warn you ahead of time that the movie is very one-sided, and many of the claims that are made about the dangers of aspartame seem to be greatly exaggerated. However, it is also very eye opening.
Even if the claims are greatly exaggerated, they still describe a very scary political battle that was behind the legalization of what is probably the world's most famous artificial sweetener.
PS- By posting this movie I am not verifying or agreeing with its views or opinions. I am condoning it as an educational piece of work for you to assess and to use as a tool to build your opinions on what you choose to eat and what you choose not to eat.
BP
The other day, after watching the movie "Sweet Misery" I started thinking about gum.
I've never been a big gum chewer, but I decided that I should go on a shopping trip and see exactly what is going on in the gum aisles these days. I was amazed by what I found.
Firstly...from what I could find at my local convenience stores, almost all gum contains aspartame, sucralose, or acesulfame-potassium (remember I'm in Canada, so the ingredients may be different then in other countries).
The interesting thing is that this includes the "sugar" gums - Even the well known "bubble gums" contain both sugar AND artificial sweeteners!
We have gotten to the point where chewing on straight sugar isn’t sweet enough anymore, we have to add artificial sweeteners to sugar to make it sweet enough for our tastes!
Secondly, and probably most shocking to me, was that several of the "bubble gums" contain hydrogenated vegetable oils in their ingredients. I had no idea that there could be trans fats in bubble gum!
Just another reason to read the labels on everything you put in your mouth.
BP
I came across a very interesting article the other day. I've been wrestling with it's suggestions for a while now and am still not sure whether or not I agree with any of them.
Take a look below and let me know what you think...but please keep in mind that this article is full of personal beliefs from the author and is not to be confused with my beliefs or with scientific fact.
End the War on Obesity: Make Peace With Your Patients
Linda Bacon, MA, PhD Medscape General Medicine. 2006;8(4):40. ©2006 MedscapePosted 11/27/2006
Your patients are desperate to lose weight. Given the presumed health imperative, you feel justified in supporting their goal. You encourage calorie restriction and/or exercise.
The "weight problem," however, never goes away. Face the facts. We're losing the war on obesity. The"common sense" approach just isn't working. Weights are increasing, particularly among dieters, and weight preoccupation and eating disorders are also on the rise.
Challenge your assumptions.
1. Weight has been greatly exaggerated as a health risk. Consider mortality. Except at statistical extremes,BMI only weakly predicts longevity. Many studies indicate "overweight" people live at least as long as"normal" weight people.[1-3] "Overweight" may even be ideal for longevity.[2]Consider morbidity. Epidemiological studies rarely acknowledge confounding factors like fitness, activity, nutrient intake, weight cycling, or socioeconomic status. Studies that do control for these find increased morbidity disappears or at least is sharply attenuated.[4]
2. Sustained weight loss is not a practical goal, nor is it well established to improve health. The vast majority of people regain lost weight,regardless of whether they maintain their diet or exercise programs.[5] And no one has ever proved that losing weight prolongs life. Some studies actually indicate that intentional weight loss increases the risk of dying early from certain diseases.[6-11]
3. Health improvements can result from improved health behaviors, regardless of whether weight is lost.[12]Improvements in insulin sensitivity and blood lipids have even been documented to occur in people who actually gained body fat during an exercise program![13,14]
There's an alternative to the war.
The new peace movement is called "Health at Every Size," and it acknowledges that health habits are more important than the scale.[12]Participation is simple. Quit hassling patients about their weight. Stop prescribing weight loss. Encourage people of all sizes to change focus from weight to health. Support everyone in appreciating their bodies and incorporating healthy lifestyle habits.That's my opinion. I'm Dr. Linda Bacon, Nutrition Researcher, University of California, Davis, and Nutrition Professor, City College of San Francisco.
NOTE: I have placed the references for this article in the comments section.
BP
Fasting for Weight Loss
When you don’t eat, your metabolism slows down.
This "nutrition fact" says that when your caloric intake is too low, your metabolism actually slows down. It has been referred to as “starvation mode” and is the basis for the current trend of advising people that they should eat every couple of hours, never skip meals, and never cut your calories too low while dieting.
But is it true?
To examine this truth, I decided to look into what happens to a person’s metabolism when they fast for a short period of time (between one and three days).
The first study I reviewed had six healthy male volunteers fast for 3 days. During this fast, the researchers measured the changes in the subject’s metabolism at 12, 18, 24, 20, 42, 54, and 72 hours of fasting. What they found was that there was no significant change in energy expenditure during any of the 7 time points. So from this study we can say that a 3 day fast in men does not cause a decrease in metabolism.
Already this evidence goes against the idea that if we don't eat every couple hours our metabolism will slow down.
The second study I reviewed had 8 men and 8 women fast every other day for 22 days straight. There was no significant change in the subject’s metabolism from the start to the end of the study. From this study, we can say that fasting every other day for a period of 22 days results in no significant changes to a person’s metabolism.
So we now know that even if we eat sporadically for 22 days, most likely our metabolism won't be affected.
The third study I reviewed had 8 men fast for either 12 hours or 72 hours and then eat a meal. After the meal their metabolisms were measured for 12 hours. This study found that regardless of whether or not the men fasted for 12 hours or 72 hours, their metabolism for 12 hours after eating a meal was not significantly different. So this study shows us that a short term fast doesn’t affect your metabolism after you eat.
So even if we don't eat for 3 days, there is absolutely no change in the way eating effects our metabolism.
So from the research I was able to review, it doesn’t seem like short periods of fasting cause any negative effects on our metabolism. Nor does it affect our metabolism once we start eating again.
Since having absolutely no calories for a short period of time does not effect our metabolism, I feel safe in saying that the idea that you need to eat every couple hours in order to keep your metabolism “revving” is actually a nutrition myth and not a fact at all. Also, the phenomena of a “starvation mode” does not happen until after at least 3 days of fasting, if it actually even exists.
BP
PS- For those of you who are interested, I will post my references in the comments section.
Eat Stop Eat
For the next couple weeks I will be posting about the idea of “Deconstructing Nutrition”.
My plan is to take many of the things that we believe to be the known facts of nutrition and check their accuracy against the actual scientific findings. Think of it as doing fact checking for the big book on nutrition.
I’m going to start with what I think is the absolute best place to start when studying nutrition – fasting. By studying fasting we learn what happens to the body when there is zero nutrition being supplied. Once we understand this, we will be better able to understand what happens to the body when we add nutrition.
Stay tuned for the first post in the Deconstructing Nutrition series.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
I reserve the right to every once in a while talk about something other than nutrition. Especially when it's a concept I need some help on.
I'll give you the background.
Two weeks ago I was at a DVD photo shoot with Craig Ballantyne and John Barban, running through a bunch of great body weight exercises with our athletes for an upcoming grrlathlete project.
About half way into the shoot Craig had the athletes do a bunch of "siff" squat and lunge variations. These are variations where you perform a normal squat or lunge, but you stay on the balls of your feet through out the exercise.
I didn't think much of it until the other day when John and I were at a meeting with a good friend of ours who is a bio-mechanist. During our conversation, we started talking about running and jogging, and our bio-mechanist friend mentioned the incredible stress that is placed on your spine during a typical heel strike (think about how your heel hits the ground first when you are running - that's a heel strike).
Then today, I was at my Krav Maga class, and I couldn't help but notice that when you are sparring, and moving around, you are always on the balls of your feet!
So this all started me thinking, if almost all athletic activity involves us being on the balls of our feet, why do we train flat footed when we are working out?
Now, my main "thing" is nutrition - It's what I know best. I love working out, and exercise science, but for questions like this I always go to the experts...
So hopefully I can get Craig, John and a couple of other people to chime in here and give us their thoughts...
BP
As the old saying goes “Eat like everyone else, look like everyone else”.
OK, I think I made that up, but it’s still true.
The way you eat is a large determining factor in the way you look and feel. For this reason I highly recommend that you read the book “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” by Michael Pollen.
In a very in-depth and systematic approach, Mr. Pollen investigates the history behind what we put on our plates, and the driving forces behind the food choices we make.
I suggested this book earlier in one of my emails for grrlAthlete.com, but now I consider it mandatory reading for anyone who is trying to eat healthy and live healthy.
The food industry is no different from any other industry -they want you to buy their product, and will tell you anything they can to get you to choose their product rather than its competition.
This constant barrage of "buy me" advertising creates a very blurry and muddled message, that leaves people confused about what they should and should not eat.
I'm often asked what's the best way to beat the obesity epidemic. Well, in my opinion, you can forget about fad diets and you can forget about drugs, because being an informed consumer is the best weapon you can possibly have against obesity.
If you want to learn the history behind the foods that people eat and the way they are manufactured, then I highly recommend you read this book.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
Back in July and August, I spent a fair amount of my time up in Northern Ontario Cottage country.
The cottage is a great place to hide out and get some reading and writing done, but sometimes it can be a horrible place to try and 'eat clean'. It's very easy to rationalize a couple bad days at the cottage as "cheat days".
For some reason, body building magazines and fitness "gurus" love to promote the idea of cheat days.
It is more than common for a dieting bodybuilder to spend 6 days out of a week eating as little as 1200 Calories per day, and then on the seventh day eat close to 10,000 Calories!
People rationalize being a complete glutton for one day with excuses like "reloading" and "refueling".
These types of excuses are based on what I like to call fitness magazine science.
Fitness magazine science is all of the theories that appear in fitness magazines that have no scientific backing. Take for instance the idea that you can't store the excess calories from cheat days. This is rationalized by stating that your metabolism increases because of the massive amount of foods that you just consumed, and therefore you burn off all the extra energy.
A perfect example of a theory with no scientific backing.
But here is the real deal, and its plain and simple math. If your target calorie intake is a 500 Calorie deficit, and you lower your intake from 2,500 calories to 2,000 calories, then you have created a 3,000 Calorie deficit over six days.
Now on the seventh day, if you gorge yourself and eat yourself into the 6,000 Calorie range (which is hard, but definitely not impossible to do), you have just undone almost all the dieting you did during the week. There is no magic that makes those calories disappear.
Your body is amazing at storing energy. Sure, you lose a little to heat production and some ramped up metabolic processes, but at the end of the day the practice of cheat days is destructive. Like I said in my previous post on metabolism, the effect that food has on your metabolism is actually very small.
The idea that your body can't store all of these calories, or that somehow these extra calories don't turn into fat is a myth and a lie that will never die. It’s OK to reward yourself with ice cream every now and then, but full out cheat days with the soul purpose of gorging yourself should be avoided, plain and simple.
BP
It is an unpleasant fact that science will always become outdated.
I am sure that a hundred years from now, schoolchildren will laugh at the principles we currently believe to be absolute scientific truths, just like how we now laugh at what was once "truth" centuries ago.
Take for instance the doctrine of signatures, which states that resemblance is a good indicator of effectiveness. If a particular plant resembles a human ear in its shape, then according to the doctrine of signatures this plant would have some sort of useful relevancy to the ear, perhaps being able to cure an earache.
While this now seems very arbitrary and somewhat unreliable, the doctrine of signatures still could be found in mainstream medical texts well into the 19th century and today is still the main principle of homeopathic medicine.
In fact, the doctrine of signatures can still be found in some nutrition myths that are still popular today. I know it's hard to believe that we would still use the doctrine of signatures with all of the research and scientific advancement that has happened in the world of nutrition, but take for instance fat, protein and cholesterol.
Many people still believe that eating fat will make you fat, that you need to eat large amounts of protein to build large amounts of muscle and that eating dietary cholesterol will make your blood cholesterol levels go through the roof.
Even though many of these "facts" are now largely disputed within the research community, people still believe them.
Why? You ask.
I think the reason is that these days science outdates itself so quickly that we no longer know what to believe. However, don’t blame the scientists for this.
You see, the job of science and scientists is to add to the existing body of research - To do their small part in answering the big question. However, most mainstream journalism and media need quick answers and they needed them yesterday! And this is where the major mistakes happen.
While scientists look at their work as something that helps answer a small piece of the puzzle, media looks at it as “THE ANSWER”.
This “jumping to scientific conclusions” can have dire consequences, as illustrated by one of my favorite articles, written by Gary Taubes and published in The New York Times back in 2002.
I think this is a very important piece of work that everyone should read, so please check it out by Clicking Here and let me know what you think of Gary's take on the last twenty years of nutrition research and policy.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
After a quick trip to the grocery store this morning, I realized how confusing it can be trying to pick out the good foods from the bad foods.
Food companies are jumping on the health claim bandwagon, and just about everything is now 'healthy this' or 'reduced that'. So here's a quick tip - The quicker it goes bad, the better it is for you.
Fruits, vegetables, meat and fish all go bad quickly, whereas cereals, boxed food and frozen food can last forever. Now there are some exceptions to this rule (nuts can last, especially if you keep them refrigerated), but generally this is a nice clean rule to go by.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
I've been following some very interesting stories in the news lately.
The first story concerns the City of New York. It seems that the Board of Health for New York City has recently voted to make New York the nation's first city to ban Trans fats at restaurants.
I found this story to be very interesting because as little as two decades ago Trans fats were introduced into our diet as a way to "save us" from the evils of saturated fats like butter and lard. And now research is starting to be published that questions the dangers of saturated fat, while trans fats are being banned by an entire city and David Kats, the director of the Yale Prevention Research Center is describing Trans Fats as "basically a slow form of poison!"
Then just this morning, I read on nutri-ingredients.com that an Australian company has just lunched a new "healthy milk" in China. This "healthy milk" has had all the animal fat removed and replaced with vegetable fat.
mmmmm yummy.
It seems to me that in our never ending quest to blame the foods we eat for our health woes, we keep making Frankenstein versions of food that inevitably come back to hurt us even more than the original versions.
My advice is the same as always. Eat lean and green. Fill your plate with as many vegetables as it can handle, don't be afraid to add as much color into your diet as possible, and try to limit the amount of food you eat that comes in a box.
And lastly, try cooking with butter. Yes butter. It tastes great, it cooks evenly, and at least with butter you know you are adding 2-3 grams of fat to your food, as opposed to some of the alternatives, in which you are adding 2-3 grams of 'who knows what' to your food.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
A couple of days ago in one of the grrlathlete newsletters I recommended that people give goat's milk an honest try (If you don't receive the grrlathlete newsletters, I've put a sign-up box on the top right column of my blog).
Since then, I've had more than a few people ask me to elaborate on why.
Well, firstly, because most of us have been drinking cow's milk since the age of two. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't have anything against cow's milk per Se, except that for many of us, we have been drinking it for more than a couple decades! So switching it up for a change may not be a bad idea.
Aside from the novelty, here are a couple more reasons that goat's milk deserves a fair test...
Goat's milk is the milk of choice in most of the world.
Because the protein in goat's milk has a different make-up than the protein in cow's milk, many people with cow milk allergies can tolerate drinking goat's milk .
Compared to cow's milk, goat's milk has similar amounts of protein, fat, iron, vitamin C and vitamin D. Goat milk has more natural vitamin A, more vitamin B , and less lactose.
Unlike cow's milk there is no need to homogenize goat's milk. While the fat globules in cow's milk tend to separate to the surface, the globules in goat's milk are much smaller and will remain suspended in solution.
So give goat's milk a try. I'm not claiming that it's some miracle food, but rather a tasty drink that many people are missing out on.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
Looks like Adam Campbell of Men's Health magazine has found himself in a verbal sparring match with the ADA.
It all started with a very well written and well researched article that Adam wrote about diabetes and carbohydrates. If you'd like to learn more about Adam's article and the American Diabetes Association's response then Click HERE to visit Adam's Blog.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
For the longest time I believed that if you dieted to strictly your metabolism would slow to a crawl. This was Bodybuilding dieting gospel.
Skip breakfast? Now you've slowed your metabolism down for the entire day. No way you’re burning any fat now!
Turns out, your metabolism is not that complicated. The idea that you have to keep your metabolic furnace stoked with food is a complete myth. Just another example of "experts" trying to make nutrition more complicated then it needs to be.
The portion of your metabolism that is affected by what you eat is very small. The largest part of your metabolic rate is set by your body weight. If you weigh more your metabolism is higher (especially if it's muscle), if you lose weight, your metabolism will go down.
The foods you eat effect your metabolism by something called "the thermic effect of food", which is the energy it takes your body to process the food you eat for storage or use, but again this is very small compared to the amount of energy it takes just to "run" your body.
It makes no difference metabolically whether you eat many small meals or one large meal. What does make a difference is the make up of these meals. Protein, carbs, fats and different ratios of each all have very small effects on the "thermic effect of food" which then has a very small effect on your metabolism.
Bottom line- It's still very important to eat "lean and green" and there are definite benefits to eating smaller meals throughout the day. But if you are looking to your diet as a way to control your metabolism, you're missing the boat.
The best way to increase your metabolism is with exercise. Other than drastic changes in bodyweight, this is the one way you can control your metabolism. Effective weight loss programs like Craig Ballantyne's Turbulence Training program or the ShapeShift program over at grrlAthlete.com are examples of good workout programs that can increase your metabolism.
Remember, if you miss a meal or cut your calories a little too low it doesn't mean you've shut down your metabolism. Your diet is still incredibly important in the fat loss process - (In my opinion it's even more important than your workouts), It’s just not the main regulator of your metabolic rate.
BP
Fasting for Weight Loss , Circuit Training for Women
You may or may not know that back in 1990, Diet Orange Crush was recalled in certain areas of the US because it had an elevated Benzene content.
Earlier that same year, there was a recall on Perrier spring water for the same reason.
Now, it's safe to say that benzene was not being added to these drinks on purpose. It turns out that two common ingredients in many drinks - sodium benzoate and ascorbic acid (vitamin C) can react to create benzene.
I'll be the first to admit that when I found this out, I was a little scared. From what I knew about benzene, this sounded like some pretty scary stuff.
You see, Benzene is an organic chemical compound that is used mainly as an industrial solvent and precursor in the production of drugs, plastics, synthetic rubber, and dyes. It's not exactly something I want in my drink.
The US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) classifies benzene as a human carcinogen - a compound that promotes cancer.
Eating or drinking foods that contain high levels of benzene can cause vomiting, irritation of the stomach, dizziness, sleepiness, convulsions, rapid heart rate, and death.
So should we throw away our sodas and never touch them again? Well for many health reasons the answer may be yes, but NOT because of the risk of benzene content alone.
Everyone is exposed to a small amount of benzene every day. In fact, auto exhaust and industrial emissions account for about 20% of our total national exposure to benzene. We are also exposed to benzene from both active and passive second hand smoke.
So while we do want to limit the amount of benzene we are exposed to, the contribution from sodas is actually very small.
It is still a good idea to read the label of any soda you wish to purchase. Avoid or limit the consumption of products that contain both ascorbic acid and sodium benzoate.
Other factors that affect the formation of benzene are heat and light. Storing soft drinks in warm conditions speeds up the formation of benzene. Interestingly, sugar has been shown to inhibit the formation of benzene.
So while the small amount of benzene that may or may not be present in your soda is not a reason to panic, it is another reason to drink mostly water or green tea and save the soda pop for special occasions.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
Back in early August, I wrote about the "secret" to preventing muscle loss while dieting (check it out here).
My point was this- based on the hundreds of measurements I made back when I had access to a body composition lab, I am convinced that if you are lifting weights while you are dieting, you will not lose any muscle.
After writing that post, I started thinking - I wonder if this is still true for VERY low calorie diets.
Turns out it is.
In a study conducted by J.W. Bryner and published in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition, subjects were put on an 800 Calorie per day diet and weight trained 3 times per week. At the end of the study, subjects lost body fat but did not lose ANY muscle mass.
This is really impressive information as the subjects were on an 800 Calorie per day diet for 12 WEEKS!
What's even more significant about this study is that the subjects were only eating 80 grams of protein a day for 12 weeks.
This study helps prove that it was the weight training and not the high protein diets that caused the preservation of muscle mass I talked about in my last post.
Based on this research, and my own research, I am certain that the best way to preserve your muscle mass, even when on an extremely low calorie diet is to weight train.
BP
Fasting Diet, Circuit Training
Posts
All Comments
