I was recently talking with a friend of mine about a hiking trip he was planning and it reminded me of this article I read several years ago. If you want to read about an objective, physical transformation, give yourself five minutes to do just that and be amazed at what a consistent, sustained approach to physical activity can do for you.
The author, and subject, is Kyle Boelte, and he is a self-described active person, who also, at the time the article was written, happened to have a job where he sat at a computer for eight hours daily.
In the eyes of society, Kyle was in good shape and lead an active life. This allowed him the physical capability of planning and completing a 29-day hike of the Colorado Trail. This is no small feet (486 miles), but the compelling part was how he measured himself before and after. He took several different physical measurements and was completely blown away by the changes. So was I.
From my perspective, the most remarkable changes were his cortisol and testosterone levels. He was at the high end of normal cortisol before he started (17.8 ug/dL) and this dropped 40% by the time the hike was over. What surprised me much more was his testosterone which more than doubled. Incredible!
So what does this have to do with us ‘normal people’? The main messages are twofold.
One, even though we do some daily physical activity, if we sit all day for our work, our body will respond appropriately. We just won’t be in as good of shape as we think we should be. This can be helped by mini-breaks during the day where you literally move through a five to ten-minute movement routine to make sure you counteract the sitting. This needs to be done multiple times daily.
Secondly, consistent, sustained movement will make a big difference over the long term. For some, this might be three times weekly. For others, it might be 30-60 min every day. It’s the consistency piece that is the most important that your body will get the most positive impact from. The point is, make this your own so you start where you are at. That’s the only thing that really matters. Progress will come with consistency.
Of course, if you want to do a 30-day hike, by all means, go for it. Just make sure you prepare yourself properly beforehand. It is clear that it can be a game-changer.
Grip strength is not usually part of the conversation when it comes to cardiovascular health or mortality for that matter. We only notice it when we encounter someone with a very firm handshake, or when we have a stubborn jar to open. It turns out, grip strength is a fantastic predictor of both mortality and cardiovascular disease. The following research summaries show us why.
Study #1
The results, published in the Lancet, show that grip strength is an even stronger predictor of death than systolic blood pressure. After adjustment for other factors, every 5-kg decrease in grip strength was linked to a 16% increase in death overall, a 17% increase in both cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality, a 7% increase in the risk of myocardial infarction, and a 9% increase in the risk of stroke. The findings were broadly consistent across different countries and economic levels.
An unexpected finding was that grip strength was a more powerful predictor of cardiovascular mortality than cardiovascular disease. This, the authors write, “suggests that low grip strength is associated with increased susceptibility to cardiovascular death in people who do develop cardiovascular disease.”
In line with previous studies, weaker grip strength was associated with increased rates of all-cause mortality and mortality due to cardiovascular disease (CVD) and respiratory diseases.
One study has reported weaker grip strength in adolescence to be associated with increased rates of death from suicide among men, but this study is the first to report an association of grip strength with mortality due to a broader range of external causes in both sexes across different age groups.
A much weaker association was observed for cancer-related deaths than for all-cause and CVD mortality.
These associations were similar in both genders and across age groups, which supports the hypothesis that grip strength might be a biomarker of ageing over the lifespan.
That is some compelling proof. Why would this be the case? Movement! Think about a farmer. They are moving, lifting, twisting, multiple times daily. This movement is a huge benefit to their overall health. The office worker has a computer at their fingertips, but they don’t do much for grip strength. However, if that office worker enjoys gardening, woodworking, or working out with heavier weights, they will also have better health overall, including higher grip strength.
The message is clear. Developing grip strength improves your overall health and will prolong life.
The growing awareness of plant-based meals coupled with our long history of enthusiasm for protein is coming to an apparent clash and leaving us wondering how are we supposed to get enough quality protein on just plants!
Before we get into that, let’s get some context regarding how much protein we should have for optimal health.
In 1890, the USDA recommended 110 g of protein per day for working men. The drive for protein peaked in the 1950’s when the United Nations declared that “deficiency of protein in the diet is the most serious and widespread problem in the world.” because of a prevailing condition called Kwashiorkor disease.
However, there’s no real evidence of prolific dietary protein deficiency in Westernized countries. Our most pressing health problems, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, pain, migraines, are not a result of protein deficiency, yet we continue to fixate on this single nutrient.
So a revision of protein guidelines was reduced from 110 grams to an average of 42 grams per day, or to be more accurate, 0.8-0.9 grams /kg ( 0.36 g per lb). This is according to the current recommended daily intake guidelines to avoid sickness and deficiency.
Females by Age Group
Total Grams of Protein Per Day
9-13 years
34
14-18 years
46
19+ years
46
Males by Age Group
Total Grams of Protein Per Day
9-13 years
34
14-18 years
52
19+ years
56
But we want to do better than just avoiding sickness. We want to thrive and make sure we are achieving levels that optimize our health, fitness, and well-being.
Many of us are in fact consuming more than what we need to just survive as found by one of the largest studies on nutrient amounts in varying diets. Observing over 70,000 individuals, researchers gathered the data to see how much of each nutrient omnivores were getting compared to their spectrum of vegetarian counterparts.
Regarding protein intake, they found that omnivores get way more than the recommended 42g, almost doubling that… and so does everyone else.
Vegetarians and vegans were also found to get 70% more total protein than recommended.
We can see omnivores and their vegetarian and vegan counterparts are achieving more than the minimum daily intake. In fact, just less than three percent of adults don’t meet protein requirements, and these are typically severely ill and malnourished individuals. A whopping 97% of adults easily meet their total protein needs so to worry about not getting enough may not be as pressing of a problem as we originally thought.
Side note: What 97% of adults are deficient in is fiber, consuming less than the recommended 30 grams per day. A focus on increasing fiber intake can move the needle in terms of improving longevity and increasing the number of healthy years lived. Plant rich diets contain significantly less fat, cholesterol, fewer microbial and parasitic infections than omnivorous diets, while at the same time providing more fiber, folate, vitamin C, and antioxidants in addition to protein. All of which are essential for preventing disease and supporting optimal health and longevity
It should be noted that there is no upper limit set for our macronutrient guides because we are lacking the data here. But omission of upper limits doesn’t mean it’s safe to have overly high amounts for extended periods of time. We can only absorb 25-40 g of protein per meal, so overdoing it can also lead to unused protein.
A study conducted by Harvard followed 130,000 people over 32 years and found that the amount of protein didn’t translate to health, rather it’s the quality.
Complete vs. Incomplete proteins
So what are quality proteins? Animal protein has been touted as a complete source of all nine essential amino acids (protein’s building blocks), and therefore historically ranked superior to plant sources.
Complete proteins contain all nine essential amino acids and include:
Fish
Poultry
Eggs
Pork
Beef
Dairy
Whole sources of soy (edamame, tofu, tempeh, miso)
Quinoa
Chia seeds
Incomplete proteins contain some but not all amino acids:
We can see from this chart below that essential amino acids can be found in a variety of plant foods as well.
If you’re eating a variety of protein foods, chances are, you don’t need to give this a second thought. Enjoying a rotating repertoire of vegetables, whole grains, legumes, nuts, and seeds will cover your needs.
Plus, our cells are continuously breaking old parts down and recycling usable components – like amino acids, and combining them with the nutrients we take in. This means we don’t need to eat complete proteins with each meal, rather a variety on a consistent basis will do us just fine.
The science is showing that it’s the source, rather than the amount of protein that makes a difference in our health. This is referred to as the protein package because food comes not in isolate. What’s included in the package are carbohydrates, fats, vitamins and minerals, and antioxidants.
Red meat is packaged with saturated fat, sodium, and zero fiber, minimal antioxidants and is linked with increased risk for heart disease and stroke. While swapping out for plant proteins such as soybeans, lentils, legumes, nuts, fish or poultry reduce these risks. Similar studies show this is also true for diabetes, cancer, weight gain, bone health, and premature death.
This is because of the protein package idea. Plant proteins are packaged with unsaturated fat which lowers LDL cholesterol, has no cholesterol, plenty of fiber, and plenty of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants. All great health protectors!
The takeaway here is straight forward. There is little danger of a protein deficiency on a plant-based diet, as long as you enjoy a variety and have a rotating repertoire of different lentils, beans, with your stews or curries, or whole grains with your meals, seeds and nuts with your salads, you’re covered!
If you are planning on eating less meat and more veggies and are not certain of how to make sure you are getting the protein quality, talk with a nutrition professional to make sure. Your body, performance and health will thank you.
Reference:
Nutrition Today – The Family of dietary fibers: dietary variety for maximum benefit
Comparison of nutritional quality of vegan, vegetarian, semi-vegetarian, Nutrients, 2014
Nutrient profiles of vegetarian and non-vegetarian dietary patterns Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 2013
Srikanthan P, Karlamangla AS. Muscle mass index as a predictor of longevity in older adults. Am J Med. 2014;127(6):547-553. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.02.007
We all need to keep ourselves clean, but in our cozy, comfy world is too much cleaning negatively affecting our health? Sandy Skotnicki Grant is a renowned dermatologist and her book, Beyond Soap, upends many of our common thoughts on skincare and presents a really current, science-based approach to how we should be caring for our biggest organ. For example:
In the late 1800’s, a weekly bath was the gold standard in personal hygiene. Think about where we are now
Skin sensitivities may be a result of ‘overcleaning’. Those natural oils we wash away have a beneficial purpose
Soap ingredients like parabens may not be the biggest culprit to skin sensitivities. Natural botanicals create some of the harshest reactions
To get a better idea of the concepts in the book, take five minutes and browse through her website, or, if you have a Globe and Mail subscription, have a read of this article. Below is an excerpt from the article that encapsulates the problem in a compelling way.
“To understand how water and soap can harm your skin, you need to understand the basics of the body’s largest organ. Our outermost skin functions like a brick wall. Daily rinsing with hot water and soap can strip away lipids (the mortar holding the brick wall together), and, over time, can weaken the skin’s ability to function as a barrier. The damage leads to dry skin, which increases exposure to chemicals, pollutants and germs, and heightens the potential for reactions to irritants and allergens. Many of these potential irritants and allergens reside in “natural” or “organic” skin-care products. Listen: The terms “natural” and “organic” mean very little when it comes to beauty products. So-called natural ingredients can be every bit as reactive as synthetic chemicals. Plenty of harmful things are natural. Poison ivy, arsenic, even anthrax – all-natural. The concept of natural or organic has nothing to do with whether it’s likely to cause a skin reaction. As one dermatologist quipped, “Eat organic – don’t necessarily put it on your skin. What’s beginning to be understood by the scientific community is that the frequent application of numerous different beauty and skin-care products, so unprecedented in evolutionary history, is profoundly changing the skin’s chemical makeup. An American team out of the University of California, San Diego, led by microbiologist Pieter Dorrestein, scanned the surface of the skin to learn about the skin microbiome – and found, to their surprise, that the single largest source of the molecules found on the skin surface was residue from beauty and cleaning products. That’s troubling because the skin is supposed to be teeming with microscopic bacteria, a part of the body’s microbiome, which plays an important role in the immune system’s continuing fight against the disease. High-pH traditional soaps and antibacterial cleansers may alter the mix of bacteria on the skin, removing the good bacteria and allowing bad bacteria to colonize in its place. Over frequent washing, in particular, can harm the skin of babies and children, possibly setting up infants who have a genetic predisposition toward eczema to develop the condition. Furthermore, damage to the skin’s barrier function has been associated with the development of food hypersensitivities, including peanut allergies.“The bottom line is, in our efforts to keep ourselves clean, we are overdoing it. The simple actions are, to use these products less frequently, and when we do, use ones with limited ingredients. For example, wash your hair two or three times weekly instead of every day. If you love your daily shower, keep it up, but stay away from soaps each time you have one. Hopefully, you will find some nuggets of knowledge in this.
