Subject: Mother of Toddler Fighting for Your Health

Submitted by: Kristin, Rochester, NY 

6/20/04

Rob,

At the encouragement of my father, I read NHE and am intrigued.  I've read South Beach, Atkins and of course a plethora of low-fat, low-calorie diet books, and your is absolutely the best-researched.  I did not come across any explanation anywhere of why the low-carb induction cycle is inappropriate for breastfeeding mothers.  Are ketones harmful to babies? Are too many other toxins released when body fat is metabolized?  Is milk supply decreased?  If you could answer these questions for me, I would greatly appreciate it.  I'm slowly weaning my son and can't wait to reprogram my metabolism and get in good shape again!  Thanks!

Kristin

 

6/21/04  

Kristin,

Tell your dad I said thanks. My inclination is to say: stick with your current diet, upgraded by applying basic NHE principles of healthy eating, then start the Eating Plan in earnest after weaning. I would have to research the subject to respond more authoritatively. Remember, too, the Eating Plan is a lifetime program. In the scope of a lifetime, waiting a short while to fully implement it makes no difference.

Rob

   

2/4/05

Rob,

First of all, thank you for your research.  I learned a lot from Natural Hormonal Enhancement and Hormonally Intelligent Exercise as well as your Video Personal Trainer and your response to another question I emailed you some time ago.  

I am curious about how important it is to minimize muscular imbalance by training previously overlooked muscles before seeking to further strengthen those that are already being trained.  You spoke about imbalance in the Back section of your video personal trainer, and in Hormonally Intelligent Exercise you stressed the benefits of performing exercises in RAM fashion, as well as detailing the importance of side and plie lunges to stabilize knees.  In your explanation of side lunges, you recommend beginning without weight until ten repetitions can be completed and progressing gradually with light weights from there.  If a person is unable to perform ten consecutive unweighted side lunges with perfect form, should s/he continue to perform squats, leg extensions and leg curls with sufficient weight to train to failure as you recommend for Intermediate and Advanced lifters, or should s/he start the Beginner program you recommend until all muscles are at least minimally trained? 

Related to that point, how "balanced" should one's antagonistic muscles be?  For example, I and many other women I know can move significantly more weight on Leg Extension than on Leg Curl (particularly lying facedown, as you recommend).  Is that something that you think will even out with time if your HIE workouts are adhered to, or are quadriceps generally stronger anyway?  I realize that you do not want specific requests for personal training via Ask Rob, but in my case I can do reps with 96 lbs on leg extension and 72 on leg curl-- don't laugh, I'm not all that experienced and I only weigh 110 lbs anyway!  I was a swimmer for many years and in college the strength trainer had us doing lots of squats, leg extensions, lat pulldowns and bench press and not much else "that I can remember," and as a result my posture is not very good and I am just now beginning to, uh, "re-balance" myself. I would appreciate your advice.

I look forward to your reply!  Thank you!

Kristin

   

2/6/05

Yes, stick with the Beginner program until all muscles are at least minimally trained. My insistence on the need to train to failure at some point is coupled with an emphasis on gradual progression. Stated differently, progression, by definition, implies ultimately advancing to the point of failure, but there's no hurry when you properly conceive of exercise, and specifically the HIE program, as something you are committed to for a lifetime. While we should realistically accept that certain changes occur with advancing age (some for the better, some for the worse), we should never anticipate or expect that someday we won't be able to exercise. For one, it tends to be a self-fulfilling prophecy because of the mental component of aging. Second, there are many people who lead active lives into and through "old age." When viewed from this farsighted perspective, the rate of progression is relatively unimportant, rather it is the fact of progression that matters.

 

. . . the rate of progression is relatively unimportant, rather it is the fact of progression that matters.


Regarding unweighted side and plie lunges, use any degree of assistance necessary to perform the exercise. For example, you can hold onto a table, or any anchored object, and use it for leverage, using your arms to help your legs. The key is to perform the movement. Stress is relative, so less strength plus more assistance is equal to more strength and less assistance. Performing the exercise with a partner's help is probably the best way, although there are always issues of practicality and convenience when relying on someone else. Especially with side and plie lunge, which impose unaccustomed stress on typically underdeveloped muscles, err on the side of more, rather than less assistance. At the same time, proceeding with other prescribed movements like squatting will, as a "stronger movement," produce a better growth hormone response. Remember, results from exercise are expressed at two levels: local and systemic. Also, squatting develops the entire lower body, including the adductors and abductors as stabilizers.

Regarding unweighted side and plie lunges, use any degree of assistance necessary to perform the exercise.
 

Stress is relative, so less strength plus more assistance is equal to more strength and less assistance.


Regarding leg extension and curl, and comparing loads of different exercises, don't be concerned with that. If you were doing the same amount of weight with leg extension as with leg curl, it would mean you have an imbalance, because, as suggested in your letter, the quads are a larger muscle group. You can't even compare one brand of leg extension machine with another because of differences in frictional resistance and leverage (every machine manufacturer puts its own "twist" or minor modification on the machine). Even free weight can be tricky. I was once thrilled that my bench press went up only to discover the bar at that particular gym was lighter than the “standard” 45 pounds.

If you were doing the same amount of weight with leg extension as with leg curl, it would mean you have an imbalance, because
. . .  the quads are a larger muscle group.


About the "the"s in HIE. It's not just that word, but also "a"s and other articles. A writer who can adapt his/her style to the subject matter, rather than being locked into a pre-set mold of expression, would have a potential communicative advantage. I very reluctantly realized while working on HIE (which began as a audio tape script) there was no way to avoid HIE being highly technical and conceptual, because exercise is by nature technical and conceptual when you "get under the hood" and treat it seriously and comprehensively. I found when comparing or relating "positive" and "negative," "antagonist" and "agonist," "concentric" and "eccentric," "biceps" and "triceps," "quadriceps" and "hamstrings," etc., over and over again, that the book seemed to have more articles than most, and their unnecessariness became more apparent than ever. Then, once I started cutting, it became somewhat of a slippery slope because I wanted to be consistent.  

. . . exercise is by nature technical and conceptual when you "get under the hood" and treat it seriously and comprehensively.

The standard I attempted to follow was along these lines. Where reference is made to a particular thing like a 40 lb. dumbbell, the text should read "the dumbbell." But if a general comparison is being made, like using dumbbells vs. using barbells, then I'd omit the articles altogether. This also has the effect of focusing or guiding the reader's attention to the conceptual issue at hand  - "apple is better than orange" or "orange is better than apple" is the height of precision. Once you start sticking in articles, it raises the question which apples or oranges we're talking about. An apple? The apple? Some apples, but not others?  

I figured it would be a little uneasy for readers until they got accustomed to it, but the unease is symptomatic having to pay closer attention. And in a book that contains relatively so few words overall, I felt this was okay. Also, you’ll notice that the least technical parts of the book have the fewest articles removed and the most technical parts have the most articles removed.  



2/15/05

I really appreciated your quick and thorough reply, and I was going to think things over tweak my program a little and get back to you.  I got a little sidetracked with the flu and it's taken me a while to catch up!  I recommend your products to everyone I know who is interested in being healthy and fit.

I've been finding out which textbooks are used in requisite nutrition classes, and they all tout the same conventional American "wisdom."  I decided to suggest that my alma mater buy NHE for its libraries, but the collection manager of the Health Sciences library e-mailed me saying, "...we rarely buy popular press titles.”  I then replied asking whether they would carry your book if I donated a copy, and she replied that "if it is of sound authority," she would be happy to add it to their collection.  I am waiting to hear back from her about who in the university will determine whether it is of sound authority! 

By the way, I did check the library and bookstore at Ball State University (online) and could not find your book there.  On what basis did they adopt your philosophies?  Or is it the athletic staff that has incorporated them rather than the academic faculty?  I'm just curious.

 

3/15/05  

Thank you for your letter, and your efforts to promote NHE to your alma mater. Though it is much appreciated, it is not necessary nor advised because no matter how objective you are in fact, it will almost always be assumed when "selling" a book you didn't write to an institution, that you are doing it for personal advantage or as the publisher's agent.

Regarding Ball State, a professor for one of their undergraduate health classes somehow got NHE, evidently was willing to publicly recognize its value, and made it required reading for his class. The university bookstore ordered a few cases of books over two semesters. The following semester the professor didn't teach the same class from what I understand and until he does we aren’t holding our breath expecting them to order for the reasons that became vividly clear to you when you tried to "sell" NHE to the university.

Regarding Ball State, a professor for one of their undergraduate health classes somehow got NHE, evidently was willing to publicly recognize its value, and made it required reading for his class.

The university asked whether "it is of sound authority.” An equally important question is whether the university is of sound authority. The professors who write textbooks are not all-knowing. In fact, many universities made millions of dollars over the years selling nutrition textbooks that say reducing dietary fat (or "cholesterol") and eating a high proportion of carbohydrate reduces the incidence of cardiovascular disease and obesity.

Note – Universities are a source of much valuable research. The question is how (and by whom) is the research interpreted and applied. The quantity of research coming out of universities is so vast that an interested party can find or "interpret" a study to support virtually any proposition – then there's the issue of a university's dependence on grant money from profit-driven concerns. Sometimes a university gets royalties from the sale of a food product, like Gatorade. You've really got to be woefully mistaken to interpret the research as showing that a "performance drink" should contain three times more sodium than potassium. Then again, this ratio of sodium to potassium has the effect of perpetuating thirst, so maybe "mistaken" is not the right word.

Universities are a source of much valuable research. The question is how (and by whom) is the research interpreted and applied. 



3/19/05

. . .do you ever wonder how they came up with those ideas, and other similarly misguided recommendations? For example, the subject of one of my personal vendettas: What gave doctors the idea to pump babies of healthy mothers full of corn syrup, a main ingredient in infant formula? It's no wonder the baby boomer generation is facing such high rates of diabetes. 

 

MONEY. Mother's milk contains essential fats, in addition to other nutrients crucial to optimal infant growth and development that would be expensive to include in a formula and would diminish profits.

 

How did the government end up sponsoring it?

 

MONEY. How did the government end up sponsoring the high-carb/low-fat diet, which breeds disease, for so long while decrying the high cost of “health care” in stump speeches and televised addresses? If people contracted heart disease or cancer at age 100 (or not at all) instead of 50 or 60, it would probably save the U.S. economy from being bankrupted by the current stratospheric cost of health care. But then again, the multi-billion dollar drug and insurance industry would have to account for a huge fall in profits.

 

Hindsight is 20/20, but how blind can doctors be?

 

MONEY. I don’t think anyone becomes a doctor to make people sick or to perpetuate sickness. But doctors are subsumed within the multi-billion dollar drug industry, and their medical school course curriculum is directed toward drugs and disease management. They are essentially “taught by relative exclusion” that nutrition is not important. In fact, nutrition is “natural medicine” – so powerful it can prevent sickness and, in many cases, make sick people well. Patented pharmaceuticals are infinitely more profitable but are mainly directed at managing or controlling existing illness, often increasing survivability, but don’t promote health and often produce adverse physiological effects that overshadow the targeted disease condition. For the most part, a medical education fosters a bias against nutrition, so those like Dr. Weil and the late Dr. Atkins deserve even more credit than the average person for acquiring an appreciation of nutrition – and even more credit on top of that for dissenting from the consensus of their peers.

 

Oh, by the way, one of my doctors does follow your NHE Eating Plan and recommended it to her patients in a newsletter.

 

That's great. There are many (but not nearly enough) progressive, objective, and open-minded doctors out there. You are more likely to be heard by a doctor than by a university bureaucrat. And once a doctrine gets "institutionalized" there's not much hope for change anytime soon. This is one reason why pharmaceuticals that harm people don’t get recalled until a lot of people die, and as a result some of the most harmful ones are still selling briskly.