Dr. Darden: GymWits Podcast, Killing Fat Page 17 & 35

Bigger Stronger Leaner Ellington Darden HIT Coaching
1

Hi Dr. Darden,

Came across your 2019 interview on GymWits…enjoyed the discussion and your insights from Killing Fat. After hearing the podcast, grabbed my copy of the book and if I could ask:

  • Page 17 of Killing Fat. You recommend six meals/day and note this is aligned with thermodynamics, but MDs and researchers note the body cannot “burn” fat while insulin is being released/in the bloodstream, which can last for three - eight hours based on the individual, the meal. If insulin is present, “fat burning” hormones like glucagon cannot be released by the body is my understanding. As there are thousands of examples of individuals leaning out on multiple meals/day, I’m probably missing something regarding leaning out on six meals/day vs. the hormone insulin storing ‘calories’/preventing fat burning.
  • Page 35 of Killing Fat. While revisiting the book, I forgot about the trainee on this page working out approximately once every nine days and looking lean, athletic and muscular. (Yes, a teenager but he also played football and lacrosse.) On Page 41 of Body Fat Breakthrough, your trainees were working out once a week. So, based on your research and work with clients from these two books I’m wondering if you’ve found anything that would suggest training more frequently would provide any benefits in terms of strength or “size”? (I know there’s lots of bro talk about this program and that program, but I don’t think any of them have resulted in the next Mr. Olympia. :smiley: And my interest is maintaining my personal levels of strength and size safely and not spending my life in a gym chasing the next best routine.)

Thanks!

1 Like
2

Trying not to speak for Dr. Darden, but this has been answered previously.

Small meals illicit minimal , short duration insulin levels.

And

Please do not ask me to provide for specific locations of this amongst Dr. Darden’s many writings.

3

Thanks, I read the board regularly (and read the old Classic X site) and have many of his books which make the statement regarding insulin.
However, did you hear the podcast that I referenced where he references the four factors he emphasizes. That generated my question…not his books or information on this site or his past sites.

FYI, from 1999:

What’s New?

We’re all victims of wanting something new. On this Classic X web site in 1999, I wrote three fat-loss related articles:

Superhydration

Big, Fat, and Helpful

Maximum Fat Loss with Discipline and Patience

Please go back and review these articles. All the basics of losing fat efficiently are spelled out in this material. I truly wish there was a new discovery that I could reveal to you on a month-by-month basis that would make the entire fat-loss process fun, different, and amazingly fast and long lasting. That’s not the case, however.

Successful fat loss is still primarily related to dieting, or eating fewer calories. Very soon eating less leads to depravation and monotonous behaviors. Evidently, depravation and monotony — if they aren’t dealt with productively — forces most dieters to search for something new, for something out of the ordinary. Doing so is almost always a mistake.

Here are my thoughts on how to deal productively with some of these dieting problems.

Mind Games?

My most recent book on fat loss is A Flat Stomach ASAP. In Chapter 8, “Synergy: Maximize the Process,” I discuss a number of result-producing actions that can assist a person who wants to lose fat.

The number-one factor in fat loss is a reduced-calorie diet. There is no way a person can lose fat efficiently without cutting back significantly on his or her dietary calories.

Second on my list of actions is strength training. To a reduced-calorie diet, if you simply add three-times-per-week strength training — then, instead of losing muscle as you diet, you will actually be able to add to your lean body mass. Of course, this provides many long-term advantages.

The third most important factor in fat loss is superhydration. I’ve discussed superhydration many times on this web site, so I won’t dwell on it again — except to point out that it greatly helps both dieting and strength training.

My research over the last 30 years shows that if your fat-loss program entails those three factors — reduced calorie dieting, strength training, and superhydration — then you’ll be relatively successful. Your adipose tissue cells will shrink and you’ll become leaner.

Most of the dieters that I’ve worked with, however, are not satisfied with “relative success.” They want the fastest-possible, fat-loss results. As a consequence, I’ve designed programs that have tried and tested various nutritional practices, thermodynamic tasks, physical behaviors, and psychological ploys. Some worked, some did not.

Gradually, I assembled a dozen or so “little things” that — when stacked together on a daily or weekly schedule — kept people focused, enthused, and serious about losing fat. Some of these behaviors are as follows:

• Turn down the thermostat
• Sleep cooler
• Drink chilled water
• Walk moderately after the evening meal
• Reduce salt intake
• Practice doing a stomach vacuum
• Accomplish a household project
• Brush your teeth often
• Join a diet group

Science says you don’t burn fat while insulin is being released and in the bloodstream – even Dr. Darden’s meals will generate insulin for 3 - 4 hours. But, three hours after breakfast, there’s the mid morning snack. And three hours after lunch, you’ve got the mid-afternoon snack. No ‘window’ for insulin levels to go down.

So, applying the science to eating 6x per day, the only time insulin’s down and glucagon/GH are up is when you’re sleeping – but even then, that doesn’t start until around 12 hours after your last meal. Based on this, there’s a the gap between Dr. Darden’s program (which works) and those who say eating three, in some cases two meals/day is better (which works).

4

I believe you forgot to include the effects of HIT to the equation:

High-intensity exercise lowers fasting and post-meal insulin levels while increasing the insulin sensitivity of exercised muscle, which partly explains the decreases in fat mass and increases in muscle mass among training individuals. (Ivy et al 1999, Rice et al 1999, Trapp et al 2008)

5

Understood – not just HIT but most exercise in general will do this. Also, there are advocates of two meals/day, 16:8 fasting, etc., who combine this with working out. eg Going back to the early 2000s, Brad Pilon and Art Devany were two early proponents of training during a fasted state to improve sensitivity, optimize GH and glucagon. The latter two (optimizing GH and glucagon) won’t happen when insulin is circulating following a meal.

6

I doubt meal frequency is a dealbreaker. Calories are important. Counting calories are important. Total calories are important. There are NO competing successful HiT professional bodybuilders. These PB’s are all on drugs. Who knows how many drugs are in other athletic endeavors. The only reason to do HiT is body transformations. Dr. Darden has been doing fat loss programs for decades. Drugs are not going away. I want no part of the drug scene in any facet of athletic endeavors. I have come to grip with reality as athletics must use drugs to win.
Other areas where HiT fails a reality check is cardiovascular conditioning. Peter Attia makes certain folks in HiT circles look silly. Face it, for decades long , slow duration cardio burns calories and conditions the heart and lungs. The undefeated 1972 Miami Dolphins used HiT via Nautilus, but they ran their buns off.
Final rant, for quite some time, Michael Mosley has shown very low calorie diets work well. Lose the fat first and then build muscle much like Upside-Down Bodybuilding did. But Hit never mentions VLCD. Sad!

Diet
What we know!
Cut calories drastically- lose weight-all types of tissues
Cut calories drastically/protein- no loose skin
Evil men running concentration camps showed this!

Man is a omnivore
Man can survive on multiple foods
Consumable Food is healthy

Enough rant for now

Marc

7

Great post covers some excellent information.

Calories – excellent point.
Hormones – here’s the “grey” area and maybe the unknown. Insulin goes up with carbs whether so-called ‘whole grain’ (we can’t eat true whole grains) or white bread, protein (proven by Dr. Gerald Reavan, MD/Endocrinologist). So (and as mentioned) if insulin is present you can’t ‘burn’ fat as glucagon can’t be released.

“Cut calories drastically/protein- no loose skin” - Listen to a variety of podcasts and heard Dr. Jason Fung note this with his patients who have fasted aggressively. Autophagy, etc., will reduce the extra tissue. As Fung said “the body’s not stupid, in times of starvation it wasn’t going to break down critical tissue for energy”.

8

Do not forget this medical principle:

The dose [conentration] makes the poison!

Dr. Darden’s mini- meals of 400 calories and even smaller calorie snacks illicit much smaller insulin responses of much shorter duration. This is what a diabetic wants. That is why multiple daily smaller caloric meals is approved by the American Diabetic Association.
Why would a non-diabetic want to adopt a diet needed by diabetic. Thus, normal behavior and logic are eschewed many times by bodybuilders, as this endeavor has turned into a self-centered, narcissistic rite of passage. I’m not surprised by this, as even the original Muscle Beach had to be shut down.
Great, what is even worse, the majority of people only try to get healthy when they get unhealthy. Today, excessive muscle mass is in disfavor, as robotics and computers have alleviated a need for such muscle tissue, not to mention such overt displays of masculinity are delegated for athletes only.

9

Very good points, sir. A friend who was an east coast competitive bodybuilder had adopted a OMAD lifestyle, but starting having various issues and gradually worked back towards two, then three and eventually four meals/day. A game changer for him – and apologies, I do not have the URLs – were two videos by a researcher who said with OMAD, to get the calories and nutrients needed you’re trying to force 2500 or more calories into a single meal. The body can’t absorb all nutrients and insulin is spiked for an estimated 12 - 14 hours, minimum. Since I don’t have the videos and the references have no way of verifying the statements but it would make sense from a layman’s perspective.

Thus, normal behavior and logic are eschewed many times by bodybuilders, as this endeavor has turned into a self-centered, narcissistic rite of passage. I’m not surprised by this, as even the original Muscle Beach had to be shut down.

Yep, I was in Venice and Santa Monica many times in the 1980s, 1990s while living in the area and saw the decay of Muscle Beach and the weight lifting area up through it being shut down. Have been back starting in the 2010s, but the homeless situation starting in 2017 or 2018 (?) made that whole area a hellhole until law enforcement finally shut it down.

But, now they’re camped east of the beach – to include Hampton and in front of Gold’s (at least when I was there in August/September).

Today, excessive muscle mass is in disfavor

I think the bodybuilding public in general is more interested in a return to saner training and physiques. When Zane is still voted #1 in some of the polls I’ve seen and the mass monsters are passing away in their late 30s, early 40s of heart attacks, outside of a few hardcore advocates of “size” the classic physique is more in favor.

But, bodybuilding also lost favor starting in the 2000s when people like Pavel Tsatsouline, for example, came along with “functional” training and later on CrossFit. Athletic individuals who lifted respectable amounts of weight, ran, could climb crazy obstacles, do ocean swims, etc., no doubt gained both attention and participants. There are two CF “boxes” within 10 minutes of my house and they’re always full when open.

Why would a non-diabetic want to adopt a diet needed by diabetic.

You’d be surprised. While in the military, our instructors advocated something along these lines…think it was Robert Haas’ program that was the nutritional basis (can’t recall) for folks with heavy PT, rucking, etc., demands. I had an adult beverage with some guys from the 7th SFG and who had their nutritionist with them three or four years ago. When not deployed, six meals/day similar to Dr. Darden’s.

1 Like
10

Just to stir the pot:

Not sure if the study is worth a damn, but the headline is an attention grabber.

1 Like
11

Dr. Valter Longo has warned of issues with extreme fasting, skipping meals, etc.

“Longo strongly advises against skipping breakfast** . While research hasn’t found an exact connection, studies indicate that people who skip breakfast tend to have much higher rates of cancer, cardiovascular disease, and death. They’re also more likely to have worse heart and overall health as well.” Intermittent Fasting: Tips to Revolutionize Your Diet and Get It

12

Not sure if the study is worth a damn

Surveys are notoriously inaccurate

Longo has lots of unproven propositions, as most of us know of someone who lived a long life and did not follow Longo’s paradigms.

13

I’d suggest Longo’s recommendations reflect a collective “best of” – what is a common dietary lifestyle across the longest lived societies.

  • Higher in whole plant foods, limited protein which keeps mTOR and IGF-1 down.
  • Three meals a day.
  • No extreme exercise…walk, moderate/safe strength training. Ultra running or triathlons probably aren’t a good path to longevity…recent findings on AFIB and endurance sports would be one example.

Fasting mimicking comes out of his own research, that of Sanjay Panda, etc. Lowers mTOR, IGF-1 and helps the body with autophagy. You can go with his Prolon or foods are listed on his website or in his book.

Had a grandmother, her brother and another family member make it to +100. Not 1:1 with Longo, but many similarities in their diet, lifestyle.

1 Like
14

I agree, surveys based on recall can have accuracy issues. From what I could find online, I couldn’t get a clear understanding of how the data was collected, so caution is warranted.

On the other hand, getting data from a controlled intervention, one that looks at mortality over a 15 year span, is very unlikely to happen.

1 Like
15

Also, one needs to qualify what is a survey – who conducts it, how it it conducted. eg The Medelian research is based on ‘surveys’ but the collected data is pretty cutting edge validation of the correlation between diet and disease, such as cardiovascular disease. In fact, it lends credibility to much of the Seven Country Study via Keyes, Blackburn, et al. (And the interesting thing? Most of the researchers who adhered to the ‘diet’ their work uncovered lived well into their 90s and 100s. Blackburn is amazingly articulate in recent interviews: Henry Blackburn - Seven Countries Study | The first study to relate diet with cardiovascular disease.)

In addition, Longo’s work includes not only working directly with populations, but he found common cellular correlations through his work with yeast, caloric restriction and longevity in the 90s which has been duplicated and validated globally.

16

Actually, this has happened in places like Loma Linda with the 7th Day Adventists where meticulous records are kept.

17

Yes, if you find a culture that has a particular diet or nutrition pattern that you find interesting, you can compare the longevity of that group to other groups (i.e., SAD). It gets much harder if you want to answer specific questions about things like meal timing. You can try to project outcomes based on the short term impact on certain bio markers, but those end up being untested predictions.

18

True, but simple tools like a bell curve provides a fairly accurate outcome if there are enough data points. eg If three population studies show these groups eat a large breakfast, dinner and light lunch comprised of plant centric meals, light protein and their bio markers via random sampling are included, those predictions on the subsequent bell curve hold up based on general statistical rules.

Taking the work done by the teams involved in the Medelian analysis using a multiple biomarkers across populations as follow on to the work of Keyes’ team, further validates the findings statistically.

19

Just a quick stir myself!

There was discussion about reaching one’s muscular potential in about 2 years initially by Nautilus. Mentzer wrote of 1 year to arrive at one’s muscular potential. Many people have arrived at a point where additional muscle gains slow considerably. This occurs in months for most new trainees. You can train upside-down and it makes little difference overall after this low-hanging fruit get used. A realization that very little actual training is all that is ever needed to reach muscular potential is never seriously discussed. I’m guessing there would be statistically insignificant difference long term in even consolidated training routines versus more complicated other training modalities. But no one wants to discuss this. That next-level, new routine is going turn me into Arnold. Lol,

Marc

1 Like
20

I don’t know how many times I’ve said the same thing but you hear the bro science, the bro collective on how the newest program, the latest supplement, diet…whatever…is going to do exactly what you describe.

I have not been in a commercial gym on a regular basis for at least 15 years, but it is a sad sight to see the same patterns with a different generation when I do visit one. All of the silly routines, different exercises and machines. Sipping the latest grow or gain or get ripped juice.

I’ll warm up, grab a heavy (for me) set of DBs and do a set of slow presses, do the leg press using slow reps and maybe a couple of other exercises. And that is it. Probably using more weight than many of these guys and in better form. The last gym where I’d trained? Two or three of the same guys from years gone by were still there, more wraps/less weight than 15 years ago but still acting like they were the next Weider star…just wait!