[MUSIC PLAYING] KATIE: Thank you for coming
to Jason Phillips talking about practical
nutrition application. I've been a client of
Jason's for a little over a year and a half. He has a variety
of different kinds of clients from elite athletes
to regular people like myself, and even people that have
dietary restrictions, stuff like that. He's a wealth of
knowledge, so I really hope that everybody has some
kind of question to contribute. Without any further
ado, you're better-- JASON PHILLIPS: It
was better this time. KATIE: I was calmer this year. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah,
that was better. We did this last year and Katie
didn't like that part as much. But-- yeah. Thank you guys, first
of all, for having me. I've picked up a little
cold since being here the last two days. I live in Florida
by way of Arizona, so I'm not quite
used to this weather. So I apologize if you
hear me sniffling. That being said, quick
little background on me, not that it's super important. But I got my way into
nutrition and fitness a little bit differently
than most people find their way into careers. I was an anorexic at
the age of 18 years old, walked around at 118 pounds. That's not a very good look on
a male, but it is what it is. I found myself in a pretty
bad downward spiral. I actually credit the whole
fitness and nutrition industry for bringing me out
of that and actually helping me find my way,
building the businesses that I have today. So I've been forever
thankful for that and my goal has always been
to pay it forward. That's what brings me
on stages like this. That's what takes me
into the hundreds of gyms that I'm in every year and
working with, literally, the thousands of clients
that my businesses serve now. With that being said, I
guess we're here talking about practical application. And I think it's a pretty
appropriate term, in the sense that 90% of what you guys hear
outside of walls like this is, this is the way to diet. This is the way to train. This is-- eliminate
this, do this. And the reality is, all of it
has some merit for probably one specific application. Everybody is going
to come in this room and every single
person here is going to have a separate set of needs. There's not one dietary
protocol in this world that serves each individual's
needs in this room. So my goal today is to
educate you and teach you what you should be looking
at, in terms of setting up your own dietary protocol. What things in your lifestyle
should you be observing? What things within the way that
you have a stress response, your activity level, your
previous dietary protocols, your training protocol? All of these things
have to go into what you're going to do nutritionally
to get the results that you desire. Now, I come to talks like this. I wasn't brought here because
I'm an amazing public speaker, but because Katie claimed
I'm a wealth of knowledge. So I'm not going to
sit up here and lecture because that gets boring. I don't ever bring slides. That's even more boring. But what I want to know is,
what do you want to know? I like to think that
everybody attends something like this because they have
a question in their mind. There's something you've
heard in the media. There's something
your friend told you. There's something you're
currently trying or have tried that you're wondering
why it doesn't work or why it does work. So let's get those
out of the way. Let's put them on the board. And then I have a really good
base to talk to you about. Someone has to be really not
awkward and break the ice. We have a microphone
right over there. And I think there's
handheld mics that can get passed around. Is this the one? Yeah. They've got them up there. So someone's got to be not
awkward and go to the stand. And there's a couple of them. For those of you guys that are
watching on the live stream, I do have the Dory pulled up and
there's two questions already on there. But someone in here has
got to be not awkward so we can get this moving. Maybe? There we go. AUDIENCE: Awesome. JASON PHILLIPS:
What's your name? AUDIENCE: Ben Johnson. JASON PHILLIPS:
Nice to meet you. AUDIENCE: Thanks
a lot for coming. JASON PHILLIPS: Absolutely. Thank you. AUDIENCE: I joined last time you
were here and it was excellent. JASON PHILLIPS: Thank
you for having me. AUDIENCE: So red meat? JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. AUDIENCE: How much
should I be eating? Can I get by not
eating red meat? Is there a point where I'm
eating way too much red meat and it's bad for my heart? What are the rules around that? JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. Cool. AUDIENCE: Thanks
for coming, Jason. JASON PHILLIPS: Thank you. AUDIENCE: I'm Doug Weiner. I have questions around
flour, gluten, GMO, organics. Where does that fit
in with someone's diet and how do they want to
sort of incorporate that? And what are the things to
avoid, that kind of stuff? JASON PHILLIPS: Absolutely. I'm going to break it
down into two ways. I'm going to say flour
and gluten because that's kind of a hot topic. But I'm also going to say
quantity versus quality because it's another
hot topic in this space. AUDIENCE: Hey, I'm Mike. JASON PHILLIPS:
Good to meet you. AUDIENCE: What do you
consider healthy fats versus unhealthy fats, if
such a distinction exists? AUDIENCE: Hello. My name is Scott. JASON PHILLIPS:
Where are you from? AUDIENCE: England. JASON PHILLIPS: Awesome. What part? AUDIENCE: Near Birmingham,
a little bit south. JASON PHILLIPS: I've
been to the NEC. AUDIENCE: Oh, yeah. OK. You're on it. I've recently been doing
spirulina, as in a supplement. What are the benefits
for spirulina? JASON PHILLIPS: I'm going to
go broad and say supplements, but then I'll put
spirulina in the-- AUDIENCE: Hi. I was wondering if
there's a difference between a whole carb, like brown
rice versus like white rice with vegetables when you're
balancing out the fiber content of a food on its
own versus the fiber content of your meal and how that deals
with glycemic load and things like that. JASON PHILLIPS: So are
we talking glycemic index versus glycemic load
versus fiber intake? AUDIENCE: Sure. JASON PHILLIPS: Does that-- that's what I gathered, right? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: First,
we said a whole carb. And then it was brown
rice versus white rice, and that's usually
glycemic index. AUDIENCE: I guess
my question is-- and I've always wondered,
there are certain foods that are high in fiber that are
low glycemic load on their own, as a food-- JASON PHILLIPS: Yes. AUDIENCE: --because of their
fiber content or whatever. Is that different, in terms
of how your body processes it from eating a simple
carb with lots of vegetables, which lowers
the glycemic load of the meal? JASON PHILLIPS: Does
this glycemic load change from an individual
food to multiple foods? AUDIENCE: Sure, yeah. That makes sense. Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: Is that
what you're asking? AUDIENCE: I think so, yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: I think
that's what I'm hearing. AUDIENCE: Yes. JASON PHILLIPS: Quick
answer, I can answer that one right away-- no. Glycemic load is glycemic load. Let's put a numerical
value on it and say 50. If it's 50 here, it's
50 here, whether that came from white rice and
asparagus or brown rice on its own. But it's good that
you're thinking glycemic load versus
glycemic index, because glycemic
index is a lot of BS. AUDIENCE: Can we
talk about that, too? JASON PHILLIPS: Absolutely. Yep. No, that was really good. I was just trying to
make sure I answered the question appropriately. Thank you. That was a good question. AUDIENCE: Hi, I'm Tara. JASON PHILLIPS: Hi. AUDIENCE: I feel like you
hear a lot of different things about, eat multiple
small meals a day. Keep your metabolism going,
versus I eat one meal a day. What are your thoughts
on that and constantly fueling your metabolism
through lots of snacks? JASON PHILLIPS: Yep. AUDIENCE: Thanks, Katie. There's also been
a lot of interest around different
diets, specifically the Whole30 is one that I know
has been really popular lately. I would love to hear
your thoughts on-- I don't know if I-- oh, someone already mentioned
that before I got here. But your thoughts
on different diets and whether those diets
are all basically fads and whether or
not it makes sense to even pursue one or change
your whole eating lifestyle. JASON PHILLIPS: Sure. AUDIENCE: I would
also like to know what you feel about cleanses. [JASON LAUGHS] JASON PHILLIPS: You're just
setting me up with that one. AUDIENCE: When you're
macro counting, say you have 135 carbs, 135
protein, and knowing that it's four grams per each of them-- JASON PHILLIPS: Or
calories per gram. AUDIENCE: Calories, yeah. Can you mix that up-- say,
do a little bit more protein and a little less carbs? I wanted you to
elaborate on that so I understand if I can play
with that a little bit or I have to be kind of exact. AUDIENCE: Can you also
explain what a macro is? JASON PHILLIPS: I can. [INAUDIBLE] JASON PHILLIPS: What's that? AUDIENCE: She's just-- [INTERPOSING VOICES] JASON PHILLIPS: Oh, OK. AUDIENCE: I have a
question about THROWDOWN. JASON PHILLIPS: About THROWDOWN. What's THROWDOWN? AUDIENCE: I want to know, why
is THROWDOWN better than some of these other stimulants
that get your heart going before a workout? JASON PHILLIPS: When
we get to supplements, remind me that
THROWDOWN even exists. AUDIENCE: I know you don't
like to talk about your own, but I'm curious. JASON PHILLIPS: I don't. I don't. AUDIENCE: So I'm
putting you on the spot. JASON PHILLIPS:
I'll happily explain why it's better than everything
out there, but what else? So for anybody that
walked in late, we're just going
through a few questions. Basically, the fact that it's
far more fun to get answers to your own questions
than it is to hear me talk about really
boring food stuff. That's what we're doing. AUDIENCE: Hi, it's me again. JASON PHILLIPS: OK. AUDIENCE: This one's simple. What's your stance
overall on fruit? Because I've read
a lot of things around how fruit is bad
now because it has sugar, which sounds crazy to me. So I want to hear from
you what you think. AUDIENCE: Hi, Jason. Colin. Do you have an
opinion of Shakeology? [LAUGHTER] Have you heard of Shakeology? JASON PHILLIPS: How far can I
go without offending people? AUDIENCE: OK, good. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah,
this is recorded, so I don't know if I can
offend that many people. I would feel really bad
if people are doing it. I'll tell you why
it's crap, but-- AUDIENCE: Hey, Jason. Miranda. JASON PHILLIPS: Hi, how are you? AUDIENCE: I was curious to
hear your thoughts on dairy. JASON PHILLIPS: Sure. In terms of? AUDIENCE: I don't
eat dairy or meat. So-- JASON PHILLIPS: Why not? Just so I know which
route I'm going down. AUDIENCE: Oh, yeah. I did a January where
I did a vegan diet and felt so much
better, in general, with everything, kept on it. JASON PHILLIPS: Was that a
21-day jumpstart, perhaps? AUDIENCE: Mm, no, it was
just a month with friends. We were like,
let's just try this out as a cleanse in
January five years ago. And now that's my
consistent diet. I eat fish, though. So curious to hear
your thoughts on what I should be considering, if
a no-dairy diet is something that you're doing. JASON PHILLIPS: Pro or con. Sure. AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: Sure. When I get to dairy, I
might have you remind me of some of those details because
I won't remember all of that. But that's a really good
question and a lot of good can come out of that. AUDIENCE: Hey, Jason. Gerard here. JASON PHILLIPS: How's it going? AUDIENCE: Quick
question on organic. From a broad base standpoint,
organic is exploding. Do you think that
certain categories, it's worth more to
pay more for organic? Or is it kind of all
just label reading? AUDIENCE: Hi. Victoria. I was wondering if you
could kind of speak to what types of meals
you'd have pre-workout, post-workout, aligning with the
macros and the meal planning. KATIE: OK. And maybe you want to write
down the Dory questions on the board. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. Another one came in, I think? No. All right. On the Dory, we have, "what
is my stance with somebody ruining their metabolism
due to malnutrition? What is the long term effect of
extended periods of undereating and/or eating poorly?" That just changed. "Is it possible to
do irreparable damage to the metabolism or
is this a wives' tale?" For that person, I'm
going to categorize that as metabolic adaptation. I'll explain that and that
should answer your question. And do you want me to go
over yours that's on here? KATIE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS:
"How does the effect on the body of
mental stress compare to the stress of
physically overtraining?" I'm just going to categorize
stress, in general. "What are my thoughts
on the blood type diet?" For Googlers who
haven't heard of this-- I hadn't until another
Googler told me about it-- it's a nutritional
philosophy that advocates a different diet for
each of the four blood types. I'm going to answer
that really quickly. It has zero merit. There's zero
scientific basis to it. If you actually go and you
read the peer reviewed studies, we've not proven that a blood
type actually correlates with certain food
intakes or intolerances. As with anything,
and as you'll get to know by the end of today, if
you feel good that way, great. But you're going to see
that any specific food type is far inferior to
the total quantity of food consumed. That's a quick
answer to that one without going too deep into it. In all fairness, I haven't
done tons of research, but I know empirically
or evidence-based, it doesn't have any merit. "Calorie spiking, i.e. Eating clean six
days and boosting calories on day seven-- what are
your thoughts on the long term effectiveness of this? It seems to be very effective
in hitting weight targets, but curious to see if
it's really a sustainable lifestyle." I've never heard it
called calorie spiking, but I'll label it that way. All right. We got a lot this time. KATIE: Yeah. And if anyone has
questions come up-- JASON PHILLIPS: Do we have more? KATIE: As we go,
after this, don't be afraid to raise your hand. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. This whole thing is definitely
meant to be interactive. So as we go, if I'm
not explaining it in a way that resonates
with you, by all means, tell me to shut up and
ask more questions. AUDIENCE: Hey, Jason. Mike here. Thanks for being here today. JASON PHILLIPS: Absolutely. Thank you. AUDIENCE: I've got two
questions on opposite ends of the spectrum. JASON PHILLIPS: Sure. AUDIENCE: One is, do you
have any thoughts on fasting, like intermittent fasting? JASON PHILLIPS: Like
intermittent fasting? Sure. AUDIENCE: Yeah. And the other-- and I
really enjoyed the last talk you gave, especially the
conversation towards the end that we had about booze. JASON PHILLIPS: Alcohol. Man, I thought we were going to
get away without that question this time. I thought people
were actually going to think I was really nice. OK, cool. Where do we start? I'm going to start with this
one-- quality versus quantity. Who brought that one up? That was on you, right? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: Give me the
specific really quickly. AUDIENCE: Well, just
as far as my wife has been trying a bunch
of different diets, specifically Shakeology is
one of the ones that came up. JASON PHILLIPS: Got it. AUDIENCE: And so
we've been looking at what are some of
the food choice options for her, in terms
of what to pick. And then, obviously,
organics and GMO foods are something that's a
very hot topic right now. So I'm just trying to navigate
that a little bit to make recommendations. JASON PHILLIPS: Got it. OK. Quality versus quantity
is the biggest debate, I think, in the nutritional
industry right now. I think if you've paid
any attention to what the literature suggests in
the last five or six years-- and when I say
literature, I mean media-- the media is trying
to get you to believe that you need to be paleo
or you need to do Whole30 and it only needs to
be quality emphasis. And I think that's great. I think that, for the
first time as a culture, our awareness of what
we're actually consuming is at its peak. The problem is I
think that we've traded an awareness of quantity
for quality exclusively, and they're not
mutually exclusive. To use an example, I think
we could all in this room agree that chicken
and broccoli or salmon and asparagus-- they're both
relatively healthy meals. The problem becomes if you
eat 500 calories of chicken and broccoli, you're
going to starve. And you're going to end up
in metabolic adaptation. You're going to find out
what that is later today. If you eat 5,000 calories
of chicken and broccoli, you're going to be fat. Right? It's factual. They're numbers. Your body, it always
comes down to calories. So when we get into
quality versus quantity, it's really clear, in
terms of metabolism that quantity is number one. But I would argue
that quality is 1A. I believe the gap has closed
a lot in our awareness, but to sit here and say,
well, Shakeology works. If you look at somebody that
had a prior diet to Shakeology, you're probably talking
about somebody overconsuming calories, right? 3,000, 4,000
calories as somebody with a BMR around 2,000. Well, all of a sudden, you
put them on Shakeology, and they're restricted to-- I don't know what
it is, truthfully, but it's three shakes a day and
a meal or something like that. They're probably coming
down to like 1,500 calories. There was nothing magical
about those shakes, except for the BS that
they're selling you in their $100 shakes and the
30 people getting paid on it. But what happened is
the calories came down. And as the calories came
down, well, what happens? Now you're in a calorie deficit. Your body's going
to spit off energy. It's actually going to burn fat. Well, that's fat loss. You could have done
that without the shakes. Right? You could've done that with
whole foods across the board, and you probably could have
gotten more micronutrients. So I think that's
the big debate here. In terms of paleo, right? In an athletic setting, if I
were to be in a CrossFit gym today, I would be bashing paleo. Because there's big
problems with paleo. Right? There's no quality
control over that diet. And somebody asked Whole30. Who was that? Whole30, right? That's the biggest
problem with Whole30. There's no quantity control. So they're telling
you, don't eat this. Don't eat that. Eat this. Eat that. But how much? Right? Oh, well, put half your
plate protein, a tiny portion carbohydrate. But how does that-- if you and I were to do that,
and 5% of your plate is carbs, and 5% is mine,
I don't know what you're doing after work today. I don't know if
you're going to train. That diet doesn't know
if I'm going to train. I don't know the intensity
at which you train. They don't know the
intensity at which I train. I don't know your life stress. I don't know your
metabolic history. Right? So every diet has to
start with some sort of previous background
on the individual. So I think the
concepts of Whole30, I think the concepts of
food quality are fantastic. But I think that they're missed
by not addressing quantity first. And I actually think-- mark my words, I'm glad
this is being recorded-- I think in five to
six years, you'll see a really big
diet fad come out that merges these two together. Somebody will hack the
way to put that out there, and will say, well, these
are the foods you should eat, but this is how you should
figure out your quantity. I'm not sure how it's
being done because, again, an individual recall is needed. And all of these macro
calculators on the internet are the worst things to
ever hit the internet. But does that answer
both questions? AUDIENCE: For the most part,
what I'm thinking about now-- JASON PHILLIPS: Does that
answer the Whole30 question? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: OK. Go ahead. AUDIENCE: Testing. So what I'm thinking about
now is, in context of my wife, she did Shakeology. She lost a bunch of weight. She went off Shakeology. She gained some weight back. It just happened. And I'm just trying to
figure out without-- obviously, working with someone
like yourself would be the best way to go to take
all of those inputs that you just said into
consideration to design a diet plan to address that. But I'm just thinking in my
head, what's an easy approach to try and do, I guess, a
calorie deficit environment? JASON PHILLIPS: For sure. The first thing I would
recommend to everybody-- if you take nothing
else away from today but this next statement, this is
the single most important thing to take away. Go home. Track your food
intake for five days. 99% of people do not
have an awareness of what they currently take in. So right now, the situation
you just explained is Shakeology, not Shakeology. I don't know what this number
of calories and macros is. I don't know what the number
of this calories and macros is. I guarantee you there's
a very big discrepancy and that's the singular reason
for the weight loss and regain. So let's create an awareness
here, minus Shakeology. Let's call it 3,000
calorie baseline. It's probably not, but
let's use semantics. Let's sit here and have a
baseline, hypotheticals. OK? Let's create a
deficit from that. Let's go in. Let's spend 20 minutes at
night and let's build a plan. Let's say 20% caloric
reduction, 15%. 450 calorie reduction. Great. Make a meal plan that's
sustainable to you with 25, 50 calories, right? Simple. Now adhere to that
for a couple of weeks. Did you lose weight? Great. It wasn't the
shakes that did it. See how it becomes
relatively simple? But first you have
to have awareness. Almost every single person
operates without awareness. I don't know the types of
problems you guys encounter here at Google. When my head goes to
IT, it's like, OK, I have a computer issue. They're not going
to get on and start telling you things to
fix before they ask you what the problem is. Well, we need to address
what the problem and what the current need state
of an individual is. Everybody should know
their need state. Make sense? Does that answer
the question better? AUDIENCE: Absolutely. JASON PHILLIPS: Awesome. As we dig into that,
we're going to dig into things like the whole
flour, gluten argument, and then the dairy thing. The dietary trends I talked
about are the Whole30s. They are the paleo
diets of the world. And forgive me if
I'm wrong, because I don't read a lot of Whole30
because it is such crap. They tell you not to
have gluten and dairy. I'm pretty sure those are two
things that are not allowed. Awesome. So for 25, 30 years, you
had gluten and dairy. It never gave you bloating. It never-- it didn't
mess up your skin. You really didn't have
any issues with it. You lived fine. You had energy. Some book and some
group of people just told you it was the
devil so you cut it out. Great. You cut it out for a year. You really didn't like
the results of it. Then you go back, and
you try to put dairy in, or you try to put gluten in. All of a sudden, you
have dairy, and you're running to the toilet. But for 25 or 30 years,
it didn't affect you. Why after this one
year is it not-- is it basically affecting you? What happens is when you
stop consuming something, the enzymes responsible
for processing it, they down regulate. You're not consuming it. Those enzymes don't
need to be active. They're gone. The problem is those are what's
called non-resilient enzymes. So when you go to put it back
in, they may never come back. So a large segment
of our population that is complaining
about dairy and gluten right now probably created
their own lactose and gluten intolerance. Thank you, paleo and
Whole30, because that's what we're getting from that. So the people that are cutting
those things out of their diet, they better be ready
to do it for life. Any dietary change
you make, you better be ready to do it for life. If you're not, don't make it. No diet-- I don't care if it's
sustainable for a year, if it's sustainable for the next
50 years, 100 years, however long we're
alive, don't do it. Make sense? Somebody had asked about dairy. Does that make sense? Does that answer some of
the question that you had? AUDIENCE: Well, I
was just curious if you had other thoughts on-- JASON PHILLIPS:
There's no research that says dairy is
good or bad, right? A lot of dairy has
live active cultures. It has great probiotics in it. There's no reason
not to consume it. I think a lot of
paleo and Whole30 is founded on very
specific applications. Rob Wolfe is a super smart dude. He brought the paleo
diet to the forefront. He also brought the paleo diet
to the forefront in the sense that he said, hey,
this is a great diet for autoimmune application. So if you have an
autoimmune disease, perhaps you should stick
to paleo-friendly foods. You should not consume dairy. If you don't have it, why are
we living in a diet specialized for that population? It doesn't make
much sense to me. At the risk of potentially-- I would hate to eliminate
dairy for a year. And then you're telling me
for the rest of my life, I can't have desserts
that have dairy in them. No, thanks. That's not a very good
quality of life for me. AUDIENCE: Yeah. I think there's just
a lot of research around the Mediterranean
diet and vegan diets and how it's good for
your heart and there's a lot of-- there's a ton of
different books and things out there you can read. JASON PHILLIPS: Remember
that books are written to sell, first and foremost. Right? I wrote a book. I sold it, made
some money on it. Great. A lot of times,
publishers will go to them and be like, how can
you frame this to sell? And when you start
looking into-- if you actually dug
into the studies and you looked at the
limitations of the application of the studies cited
in those books, the best one I can think
of is carb backloading. I'll address that in a second. You start seeing it was a
very selective population. It was a very small
sample size and it really hasn't been tested
year in, year out. Now also remember, those
people were largely unhealthy before they got on this diet. So was it that
specific dietary change that created that
next level of health? Possibly. Was it exclusively that? We don't know. So there's a lot of
ambiguity in the space. My answer to you would be this. If you feel really
good off dairy, and that's sustainable for
you for the rest of your life, absolutely do it. If you don't feel like
that's sustainable for you the rest of
your life and it's not a single thing holding you
back from that next level, don't start there. See how there's always an "if"? And that's the one thing
that's the hardest part about doing seminars like this. I would love to be like, yeah,
there's a definitive answer. 99% of the stuff we'll
talk about today, there's no definitive answer. It's what's going to
suit you long term. Does that makes sense? AUDIENCE: Could you
talk about the enzymes as they relate to sugar? When you start to reduce
your sugar intake, over what time horizon
does your body [INAUDIBLE]? JASON PHILLIPS:
Yeah, so sugar should be less about
enzymatic production and more about blood
sugar regulation, right? And so the extreme
example of that would be going super
low carbohydrate into a ketogenic state. You're basically
lowering-- you're basically decreasing your insulin
sensitivity long term, because you're living
in a state of ketosis. You don't really have to learn
how to take in carbohydrates. So if you decrease
carbohydrate intake for a super long
time, especially the female population, you
decrease insulin sensitivity, you're actually going
to a really hard time reintroducing carbohydrates. It has to be done
in a systemized way. That's why you see a lot of
females, specifically, whose metabolisms are very less
resilient than males. It's just unfortunate. It's the way it is. They have a hard time
going low carb back to normal calorie, normal
carbohydrate intake, especially if that low carb or
ketogenic state was prolonged. So all these diets out
there that are like, well, go super low
carb for three months, and then we're
going to go through this carb reintroduction stage. I was just in
Louisiana and they had one called the Ideal Protein
diet or something like that. And they were telling
me about that, where it's all this protein,
and then at some week, you reintroduce carbs. For the male population, great. Male metabolisms, male
hormone profiles-- they're built for that. That's not an issue. Females-- you're not. Females have a greater degree
of metabolic adaptation faster. It just is what it is. There are statistics around it. We don't know why, internally. Does that make sense, though? So it's not really
an enzymatic thing. It's an insulin
sensitivity thing. So reducing sugar, assuming
carbohydrate intake stays normal-- fantastic idea. Now we're reducing inflammation. Now we're reducing--
we're keeping blood sugar more stable for
a prolonged period of time. When blood sugar is stable,
energy levels are higher. You also have less
propensity to store fat. That's a great idea. So if we're reducing
sugar intake, keeping carbohydrate
intake high, or keeping it moderate or
relative to where it was, awesome idea. Reducing sugar intake plus
reducing overall carb intake-- not a great idea. Make sense? Question came up on the Dory
that had to do with this. "What if you have cut something
out for several months? Are you basically out of
luck to reintroduce it? How long does it take to
totally lose those enzymes and never be able
to get them back?" The question on the
duration is I don't know. It's going to be relative
to each individual. But let me reiterate
that I was specifically talking about gluten and dairy. Dairy and gluten are the
non-resilient enzymes. Let's say you cut it out
for other food groups or other types of things. The literature
isn't super clear as to the rate at which
it's going to come back, if you can get it back. And even on gluten and
dairy, not everybody is going to be
non-resilient forever. Some people are going
to get those back. But just being aware of the fact
that they are non-resilient, some population will
never get them back. That's the takeaway of what I
was trying to get out there. Hopefully, that answers
your question, Anonymous. On that, we'll go to glycemic
index versus glycemic load. Obviously, I think
10, 11 years ago, glycemic index was super hot. They said, got to
eat brown rice. Cannot have white rice. Got to eat sweet potatoes. Can't have white potatoes. Got to eat oatmeal, can't
have cereal, et cetera. I'm sorry. That's complete BS. The reality is a
calorie is a calorie. A carb is a carb. It might impact your
insulin a different way. That is the truth. But we have to know what the
outcome we're talking about is if we're even
talking about it. There's this whole
popular movement of if it fits your macros,
flexible dieting application. It all actually started in
the bodybuilding community. And so remember that the
bodybuilding community has one goal, and that's
to look really good on a specific date on a stage. They don't get tested for health
markers when they're on stage. We don't look internally. We don't do blood work. We don't ask them how they feel. We judge them strictly
on aesthetics. So in terms of glycemic
index, in terms of sugar versus
fibrous carbohydrate, a carb is a carb, in
terms of aesthetics. Now we get into the
health side of things. It's completely different. Insulin response matters. We don't want a super
high insulin response, or you're going
to feel like crap. Energy levels are
going to go real high. They're going to crash. You're going to feel
real bad, right? They're going be all
over the place all day. That's where some of
that fatigue comes from. But when we're looking at
glycemic index versus glycemic load, how many people in
here-- show of hands-- eat a bowl of white rice by
itself or a bowl of brown rice by itself on a regular basis? Those of you guys that can't
see the room, that's zero, OK? You're always going to
pair that with a food-- white rice with steak,
brown rice with chicken, whatever, sweet potatoes
with some sort of meat, or if you're a vegan, even
with another carbohydrate. That's going to change
the overall impact of that food on your
body, and that's what's known as glycemic load. So earlier, we referenced--
glycemic load of two paired foods versus one food
by itself is the same, right? The number is the number. So if we were to even
be taking into account some sort of glycemic
variable, index or load, we should take into
account the glycemic load. But even that is going to be
secondary to what we first talked about, which is
the quantity of the food. The overall quantity
of the macros relative to the overall
calorie intake for the day. Does that make sense? AUDIENCE: Can you
explain what a macro is? JASON PHILLIPS: Yes, a macro-- I should have started there. I apologize. So that's actually really good. I don't know why
I didn't do that. A macronutrient-- it's a
protein, a carbohydrate, or a fat. When we start and we look
at any dietary protocol-- I mentioned earlier,
to this gentleman, Shakeology versus
non-Shakeology, total calorie intake versus a
lower calorie intake. It's one thing I
explained in that. It's calorie control
that determines weight gain or weight loss. That's always how
it's going to be. However, when we're
looking at fat loss, we're looking at composition
of those calories that we're now controlling. Perfect example of that
is the McDonald's study. I think I cited that
last time I was here. There's a guy out there. He said, I'm going
to lose weight. I'm going to eat
nothing but McDonald's in a calorie-controlled manner. He ate nothing but McDonald's
in a calorie deficit. He successfully lost weight. They looked at the body
composition that he lost. He lost muscle
and kept body fat. So when you put two and two
together, he lost weight, but he got fatter. Is that anybody's goal? OK, good. So when we look
at two things, we try to create a calorie deficit. We try to create
a calorie deficit with an appropriate
macronutrient composition because I don't know
anybody that wants to lose muscle and gain fat. And if so, that's cool. We can have another
conversation or we can take you somewhere else. So that's what a
macro is and that's why we worry about
macro composition. In fact, every single client
I work with, I don't even tell them their calories,
because what I get is, I get the macro
manipulation game. So they come to me
and they're like, oh, I can have 2,500 calories? Cool-- I wanted cake tonight, so
instead of all that protein you told me to eat, I
had more calories from carbohydrates
and fat, cool. You're going to be like
that McDonald's dude. So macro manipulation
doesn't work out, long term. On that, we'll go to the
protein-carbohydrate, the calorie balance. The biggest thing, when
you're in a calorie deficit, is understanding there has to be
enough dietary protein, right? So when you're in
a calorie deficit, the single goal of
any dietary phase is preserve the
lean muscle tissue-- strip the body fat, right? That's what we're after. We're trying to get leaner. The lean muscle
tissue is actually your most metabolically
active tissue at rest. So the more lean
tissue you have, the more calories
you're burning at rest. We don't want to put
ourselves in a position where we're going to lose that. That's where protein
intake comes into play. You have proteins, and you
have protein-sparing nutrients. When the protein-sparing
nutrients are lower-- i.e. carbs and
fats being lower-- the need for protein goes up. So when you're in
calorie deficit, your protein intake's always
going to be at its highest. Take somebody that's
trying to gain weight, now we could potentially
bring that protein down and bring the carbs and fats
up because they're already in a calorie surplus. There's really no need to worry
about sparing that protein. You have plenty of
calories to go there. Does that make sense? So are they interchangeable? The answer is no. Make sense? From a calorie perspective, you
might still see the same result on the scale. But you're not going to see
the same result in the mirror. And I have never-- AUDIENCE:
[? Because you didn't ?] increase your protein? JASON PHILLIPS: Correct--
well, if carbs come down-- so you're talking about if carbs
come down and proteins go up. The problem there--
in some instances, that's fantastic, assuming a
normal functioning metabolism. And so I'm sitting here
knowing our work together. Assuming metabolically
adapted, no, that's not going to work
because carbohydrates have the most impact on
the metabolism, right? So if somebody has a previously
non-functioning metabolism, we have to have
carbohydrate intake to spike those metabolic
hormones-- that leptin, that ghrelin, that
T4 to T3 conversion. And so if we're actively
reducing carbohydrates in favor of protein, you will
eventually create glucose in your body, but in
a very non-efficient metabolic pathway. Does that make sense? OK, within that is
the meal frequency. How many times you eat
a day does not matter. There is actually more and
more evidence coming out that a less frequent meal
schedule is actually better, in terms of muscle
gain and fat loss. Now, does that mean we should
go to intermittent fasting? And the answer is no. There is absolutely
nothing magical about intermittent fasting. I have one time that
I will give somebody an intermittent
fasting protocol, and that's if we're seeing
really poor digestion. There are studies that show an
uptick in digestion and ability to digest based on a
prolonged fasting period. So that's really where
that application comes in. In terms of fat loss,
there's zero research that supports it,
especially in terms of maintaining lean tissue
or adding lean tissue. There's actually research
that supports it's awful and that it should never
be used in that protocol. So a certain website
out there, "Lean Gains," is completely full of crap. And that's just evidence-based. The science is out there,
so that's not conjecture. However, this being said, if you
look at intermittent fasting, like I said with our
argument on the Shakeology, you see a lot of
people-- if I told you, and you're not aware of what
your caloric intake is now, that your feeding
window is shortened to five hours versus
12 hours, you're going to consume less calories. Well, why did you lose fat? Not because of any
fasting protocol, but because you ate less food. If I told you that
you had to put all those calories
in that same window, nothing's going to be different. So if it's more convenient for
you to eat five to six hours, if it's mentally more
controllable to keep your calories under
control by limiting them to a five-to-six-hour window,
there's no risk for any issues, assuming you're not
starving yourself. And if that's what's going
to lead you to compliance, then I would encourage
you to do it. At the end of the
day, it's whatever is going to yield
compliance, whatever is going to allow you to
comply to a successful setup for yourself, long term. That's what's going to matter. But I think that
everybody looks at, well, should I do
intermittent fasting? Should I do carb cycling? Should I do carb back loading? Should I do paleo? Should I do Whole30? None of them matter
unless it's something that you can stick to long term
and unless the application is to you, specifically. Does that answer the
interment fasting question? Yeah? Meal frequency--
who had that one? I feel like it was a
little more in-depth. Does that answer the question? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: So
there's definitely no research-- the whole reason
on meal frequency, that you say you've got to eat every three
hours to keep the metabolism elevated-- that was the
whole crux behind it. They've actually found that
that's completely false. And there's so much science
coming out now to back that up. Along those same
lines would be, well, don't eat carbs after 6 o'clock. I would actually
argue, flip the script. Eat all your carbs
after 6 o'clock. If I had to give
you one option-- all your carbs before 6,
all your carbs after 6-- I would take after 6. AUDIENCE: Why? JASON PHILLIPS: There's
significant evidence on, basically, the
stimulation of the metabolism, the thermic effect of
having that feeding at night on actually having
the metabolism elevated later in the day through the evening. Also, getting an insulin
response at night, getting a big insulin response
from the carbohydrate feeding-- think about what happens. Insulin's here-- after that,
it comes back down, right? It falls. When insulin levels are low,
cortisol levels increase. HGH levels increase. With high cortisol,
with our ability to wake up with a
normalized cortisol curve, with our ability to wake up
with elevated HGH levels, guess what we're
using at that time? Elevated cortisol equals
mobilization of fat. Make sense? AUDIENCE: In general,
would you say there's a certain
period [INAUDIBLE] you should eat after [INAUDIBLE]? JASON PHILLIPS: No, no-- I think last time
I was here, I said I get into bed with a Skinny
Cow ice cream sandwich. [LAUGHTER] And I lost my man card,
so I never said it again. AUDIENCE: Just make sure that
you're repeating questions if they don't have the mic. JASON PHILLIPS: Oh
yeah, sorry about that. AUDIENCE: For meal
frequency, I hear less about keeping
metabolism high and more about keeping your blood
sugar levels [INAUDIBLE]. You're less likely to
snack and graze and pass the [? day target. ?] Is
there a truth to that? JASON PHILLIPS: The question is,
in reference to meal frequency, it's not so much about
metabolic rate being elevated, but in terms of blood
sugar being stabilized. I would actually say there
is some truth to that. But again, that's
going to come down to eating the right
amount of food throughout the course
of the day, right? If you wake up and
you're like, all my carbs are going to be at
breakfast, that's probably going to necessitate
another meal in three to four hours. Because obviously,
your blood sugar levels are going to be all
over the place, right? You're going to get a
really high insulin spike. It's going to come back down. You're going to feel like crap. You wake up-- you
have a balanced meal. There's no set
intervals that are going to keep that blood
sugar more stabilized. It's really going to come
down to metabolic rate, overall calories being taken in. Does that make sense? Because if you only had
500 calories for breakfast, and you're consuming 5,000
calories in a day, absolutely. Your blood sugar's going to
start to drop in an hour, hour and a half. And yes, that would be an
appropriate time to eat. But relative to
fat burning, it's not going to do anything more
beneficial or less beneficial. That comes down to energy and,
like you said, mental clarity, focus, things like that. And absolutely, keeping blood
sugar levels stable all day-- 100%, and that's where I would
look into meal frequency. Make sense? Does that answer your
question on meal frequency? The best tool I
can give anybody, in terms of meal
frequency-- eat at the times it's going to be most
consistent, day to day. So one of the questions I
ask a client right away is, how many times can you routinely
commit to eating every day? Is it 3, is it 2, is it 5? Is it 10? If you want to eat five
times every single day, great-- commit to
those five times. Why? Because when you travel, you're
going to say to me, well, how do I count when I travel? Well, I really don't want
you to count when you travel. But can you eat at
those same five times the approximate things
that you'd be eating when you're at home, right? If you're waking up and you're
having eggs and oatmeal, great. When you're out at
a hotel, when I'm on the road 200-plus
days a year, I can find eggs and
oatmeal in a hotel because that's what I'm
used to eating at home. At lunch I can find some sort
of protein-carbohydrate combo. I eat four times
every single day. I know how to find
that everywhere I go. That's how I'm able to maintain
my shape everywhere I go. Does that make sense? So there's a lot
of deeper things that you have to go into and to
individual application there. But the science, the
evidence, supports that there's no
increased fat loss, in terms of meal frequency. AUDIENCE: Are you supposed
to be hungry in the morning? JASON PHILLIPS: The question
is, are you supposed to be hungry in the morning? The answer is yes. Hunger is a very good
sign of metabolism, of metabolic activity. So people that are like, oh,
I'm hungry-- good, right? If you actually came to me
and you said, I'm not hungry, I'd be scared. It's usually indicative that
you're not eating enough. Mind you, if you're eating
10,000 calories a day, that's not the case. But most people
that come to me that complain of lack of results,
and they're not hungry, it's very indicative
that they're overstressed and not eating enough. So hunger is a very good
physiological response. AUDIENCE: You said you mentioned
eating carbs late at night, after 6. JASON PHILLIPS: Yes, yes. AUDIENCE: If I work out
first think in the morning, I usually try to have most
of my carbs in the morning and then taper it
off over the day. JASON PHILLIPS: So what time
do you work out in the morning? AUDIENCE: 7:30. JASON PHILLIPS: Do you eat
before you go to the gym? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: OK, what do you
think your pre-workout meal is? AUDIENCE: It's a cup of coffee. JASON PHILLIPS: What do you
think your pre-workout meal is? Where do you think your
body's getting fuel? AUDIENCE: Oh, from the
dinner the night before. JASON PHILLIPS:
OK, so that would be another really good reason
to have carbohydrates at night. AUDIENCE: That makes sense. JASON PHILLIPS: Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS:
Your body's always going to go back to
the last thing it had. In fact, a lot of people
in here, or in general, are like, oh, I'm going to
the gym and have a protein bar or I'm going to have a banana
or I'm going to have this or that to get me fueled, right? Unless you're
using a super carb, a high molecular-weight
carb, you're really not getting usable
fuel for four to five hours out of your food. So it's one of those
types of situations where your body is--
you definitely should be having more carbs at night. However what you're
doing in the morning and having carbs post-workout,
fantastic, right? So for you to maximize your
day, to maximize blood sugar regulation, I'd be stacking
your carbs in the morning, stacking them at night, more
of your proteins, and fats, and vegetables
throughout the day. It would make a lot of sense. Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: Cool--
any other questions on meal frequency
or meal timing, relative to different
times of day? Cool. What is a macro? We did that one. Healthy fats-- who
asked that one? What was the question, again? AUDIENCE: So much of what
I hear is the 180 of fat is evil to fat's good now. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah, fats are
the best thing in the world, if you look at the media. AUDIENCE: But a
lot of that comes down to healthy fats, like whole
fat, dairy, avocado, olive oil, [INAUDIBLE] animal protein. I'm not really clear
what the bad fats are. If I'm cooking at home, as long
as I'm not getting fried crap. JASON PHILLIPS: Correct. Yeah. And that's, honestly--
the oversimplification of what you just said-- and
I know that wasn't heard, but I don't know how to
restate that whole thing. Basically, he said
animal fats, oils, nuts-- how do we draw the line
between good and bad fat? And he said, as long as
you're not eating fried crap, is he not eating bad fat? And that's very oversimplified,
but the answer is yes. If we were to go
even deeper and we were to look at
inflammatory response, anti-inflammatory response,
you've got omega-3, 6, 9. Those are the three
that we really look at. The problem is that the Western
diet is very high in omega-6 and it's lower in omega-3. Omega-6 is pro-inflammatory. Omega-3 is anti-inflammatory. So we deal with a
population that's very inflamed because our
diets are rich in omega-6. So the reason everyone's big on
this whole take in healthy fat thing-- what they're really
saying is, get more omega-3's. Increase your ratio
of omega-3 to omega-6. That can be done
through supplementation. That can be done through
things like coconut oil that are a medium-chain
triglyceride that supposedly provide energy for fat burning. That's really skewed science,
but the better statement would be, get more
omega-3's in your diet. Does that make sense? That's really what people
are pushing you towards. But again, that explanation,
that's not super sexy, right? So people are going to be
like, well, just eat your fats because everyone loves bacon. AUDIENCE: What are examples
of omega-3's and omega-6's? JASON PHILLIPS: Omega-6 is
primarily found in chicken. That's the one big mistake
that everyone's making. Salmon's really good
in omega-3, omega-9. Omega-3-- eggs are a
really good source. It's not so much that we
have a hard time finding omega-3's because usually when
you're getting omega-6's, you are getting some omega-3's. It's that we're over-consuming
things like chicken that are super high in
omega-6, void of omega-3. But supplementing with
things like fish oil is obviously very
beneficial, because you're going to get a high ratio
of omega-3 to omega-6. Go ahead. She's got the mic so
that they can hear you. AUDIENCE: Is chicken high in
omega-6 because of the farming quality-- JASON PHILLIPS: No, no. AUDIENCE: --or just because
that's naturally how it is? JASON PHILLIPS: In general, just
the naturally occurring fats. The farming quality has
nothing to do with the fact that it's primarily omega-6. Yeah. Does that make sense? Does that make
sense on the fats? We've got, by time
standards, seven minutes. I think a lot of people
are prepared to stay 30 minutes after, so I
just want to make sure that I try to cover everything. Is there anyone that has to
leave, that's time sensitive, with their question
on the board? OK, cool. Cleanses. Yeah. I could go on for days, right? Cleanses are an absolute way
to go about things, right? It's basically, you're not
going to stay on a cleanse. One statement I made earlier is
something you should be doing should be something you're
prepared to do forever. Cleanses are never a
way to achieve anything. They're super low
calorie by nature. Recently, I think that
they're done with green shakes and they're very micronutrient
rich, which I think is great. But it implies an
extreme calorie deficit, which is usually going to
yield rapid weight loss. But that's never sustainable. So you get people
that go on cleanses. They lose 10, 18 pounds. They're like, oh, this is
the best thing in the world. Then the weight comes
back on, inevitably. You cannot sustain
500 to 800 calories, reintroduce those calories,
and expect yourself to not gain weight. I don't care what you've done. I don't care if you've gone
on a three-week bender. You should not come back
and go on a cleanse. A, from a psychological
perspective-- and 90% of dietary
compliance is psychological-- you're teaching
yourself that it's OK to drastically mess
up because, hey, there's this fix right afterwards. That's a really
bad feedback loop to get into, long term, right? So if you do go on
a three-week bender, come home and get back on track. It's the best thing you can do. But to use a cleanse
is the worst thing you can possibly do. Now, people are like, what about
a liver cleanse or something to help your gallbladder? If you have borderline
diseased liver, if you've got kidney stones,
or you've got problems somewhere
physiologically, perhaps look into a cleansing
protocol to help with that. But that's completely
different than saying, I'm going to go on the
latest juice cleanse to lose 20 pounds. Does that answer that question? Is anyone not going to
do a cleanse, please? Sorry if anybody does Isagenix. AUDIENCE: What if the
cleanse isn't about fat loss and it's about
digestive function? JASON PHILLIPS:
Give me an example. The question is, what if it's
about digestive function, not fat loss? AUDIENCE: My girlfriend went
through a Candida cleanse and she's not fat. But she did it solely-- JASON PHILLIPS: But she
potentially had Candida? AUDIENCE: I think she read
a few too many things. But she just put herself through
a prolonged cleanse period and it was solely for
digestive purposes. JASON PHILLIPS: Sure. If you potentially
have Candida and you think that you're borderline,
that your GI is messed up because of it, that would
be one of the physiological applications that I
think would apply. Because you're trying to
fix something internally that's physiologically
messed up. Does that make sense? It's not about weight loss. And largely, those
cleanses, right-- largely, they're taking out
lots of different food groups that potentially can create
an environment for Candida to feast off of. But they're also not
super low calorie, right? A lot of those are
still involving what you would need to survive. And you're also not coming
out of that being like, I'm down 15 pounds. Oh, crap, I gained five
pounds the next week and you freak out. Because that was never the
mentality going into it. So yeah, I would say
that's super appropriate. I would have absolutely
zero issues with it. Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah, absolutely. JASON PHILLIPS: OK,
so moving with that, going into supplements. Supplements are exactly
what they say they are. They're a supplement to
an already good diet. Anybody that comes to me
that says, OK, awesome, all that macro stuff
is really good. All that timing
stuff is really good, but what about this fat burner? Is that going to
help expedite things? I get really, really worried. The chances are, they're not
going to follow the diet. They think that by taking
that fat burner in the morning that it's going to
expedite the results. It never is. Are there some supplements
that can actually help with quality of life? Absolutely. As somebody that
owns a company that works with thousands of
people at this point, I think things like taking
vitamin D are very essential. If everybody in here,
especially being in Chicago, were to go and get a 25OHD,
which is a blood test to measure vitamin D levels,
I'd bet you 95% of us would come back low
or sub-clinical. Now, vitamin D is
so powerful, it could be classified
as a steroid. It's a precursor to
hormone function. Obviously, it's going
to help regulate mood. There's a host of benefits
of having adequate vitamin D levels in your life. So I absolutely recommend
with supplementing something like vitamin D. A lot of
us are low in magnesium. Magnesium helps us recover
from day-to-day work, day-to-day stress. It's a precursor to
neurotransmitters. It's going to help us
sleep, so I'd recommend supplementing with magnesium. Those of you guys that
are resistance training, I think branch-chain amino acids
are a fantastic supplement. But the reality is,
supplements are not needed. For us to survive,
for us to thrive, we absolutely can
get away by eating the right types of foods,
the right quantity of foods, the right quality
within that quantity, and never need a supplement. You asked the question
about spirulina. Is that going to help? It's going to get you
more anti-oxidants. It's going to get you
more micronutrients. Do I think that creating a
more neutral, less acidic environment in your
body is a good thing? 100%. We know that cancers,
diseases, they thrive in an acidic environment. So if we can keep you
more neutral or more on the base side, great, right? The water I walked in
with today-- it's 9.5 pH. I think that's a fantastic
way of going about it. Is it essential to survival? No. Does it help if you have some
extra money to invest in? Sure. But remember, supplements
cost money above the food. And if you're going to
spend money on either side, spend it on the food. Get really high-quality food. Eat the right
amounts of your food. I see 95% of problems
resolved in and of that. So then the question
is THROWDOWN. And of course,
I'll talk about it. The reality is that
nobody in here's probably going to
benefit from it. How many people in
here do CrossFit? One, two. How many people in here
do aerobic activity? OK, a decent amount. So what's in THROWDOWN? The typical
pre-workout product-- and this is for
everyone that trains. If you're going to take
a typical pre-workout, it was designed
to enhance energy. So they put a stimulant in
there, lots of caffeine. Back in the day, ephedra
was borderline legal. But there was things like
synephrine or citrus aurantiaum that were really popular,
that would mimic ephedra. So they put high doses of that. And then they would put
a vasodilator in there. And what a vasodilator is,
is it increases blood flow to the working muscle,
enhances that pump, enhances that vascularity, makes you
look bigger at the moment that you're training
that muscle group. It feels really good, right? As that progressed, they started
putting mental components in it. DMAE. It was a European party drug. They figured out that it made
you have that euphoric feel and they actually put that
into American supplements. Shocker, people started
dying and it's now illegal. So then you go over, and we
created our product to be, basically, the opposite of that. We deal with a
population that does not want blood flow to
the working muscle because it's going to help
you fatigue faster, right? Remember, in the gym, if you're
doing bicep curls, who cares if you fatigue at 8 or 12? Your biceps are bigger. That's what matters. In a performance setting,
if you're fatiguing earlier and you can't go
later in the rounds, or later in your endurance
ride, or whatever it may be, your performance sucks. You lose. We've created a product that
delays the onset of fatigue and delays-- it helps enhance that
muscular endurance. Also, it gives you the ability
to breathe at higher heart rates. So as you go closer to red line,
you can breathe later in that, giving you that
extra potential five reps before you
put the bar down, and someone else puts
the bar down first. Obviously, other ingredients--
cordyceps, citrulline, there's really good studies on both. That's really what
it comes down to. That's the difference
between THROWDOWN and other pre-workouts
out there. He asked that, so I could
plug my company for free, which I'll do really cheaply. I own Mission 6 Nutrition
and Mission6Nutrition.com. There you go. Thank you for that plug. Go ahead. AUDIENCE: You said your product
THROWDOWN delays fatigue. JASON PHILLIPS: Yes. AUDIENCE: How? JASON PHILLIPS: So when you look
at the studies on citrulline and you look at the
studies on cordyceps, we sourced an ingredient
called Peak 02. It's a unique blend
of cordyceps extract. There's really good
studies on cordyceps that it actually
gives you the ability to breathe at
higher heart rates. As you go deeper,
closer to red line, as your body inherently
gets to its red-line level, it will naturally
shut down output. However, if you're able to
keep your heart rate down as you're getting closer to red
line, near maximal capacity, you're going to
continue to work. That's the delay of fatigue. You can do more work
closer to red line. Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah, I
have more questions. JASON PHILLIPS: There's
two specific ingredients. And there's really--
no, keep going. But there's two
specific ingredients. It's the citrulline
and cordyceps. The studies on citrulline are
more about aerobic capacity, but that wouldn't
enhance ability to work at higher thresholds. AUDIENCE: OK. JASON PHILLIPS: Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: Keep going. I see it. You got questions. Keep going. AUDIENCE: Yeah, well, I'm
doing a few studies in school right now and they're
trying to figure out what really causes fatigue. So if you've got a product
that delays fatigue-- JASON PHILLIPS: OK. I would love to know
what's causing it, as well. But what we-- the
ingredient profile was based on studies
showing these two products delay fatigue, based
on statistical data. We didn't necessarily
research why. We just know they work. And then you're putting blends
of products that work together, creating that environment. AUDIENCE: And this was
in an aerobic setting more than anaerobic? JASON PHILLIPS: Correct, yeah. AUDIENCE: Cool. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah. I got it. JASON PHILLIPS: I
would love to know why, but obviously it's
still-- it's going to be, to some degree, build-up
of byproducts like ammonia, lactate. There's going to be
something in there. But it's not something like
a carnosine, beta-alanine response. We don't even have
beta alanine, so-- AUDIENCE: OK, thank you. JASON PHILLIPS: Yep. AUDIENCE: Given you said you're
on the road 200 days a year, and obviously everyone's
body is different, what does your workout
schedule, roughly, look like? How do you maintain, obviously,
the fitness that you do? JASON PHILLIPS: That's
a really good question. The question is, being that
I'm on the road 200-plus days per year, how do
I maintain my physique? What is my workout
schedule like? That's actually a
really good question and I'm going to lump it in-- someone asked about stress. I, for a long time, did
CrossFit at a very high level. Three and a half
years ago, I was training to compete at the
highest level of CrossFit, doing two workouts a
day, seven days a week. As I've gotten
busier and busier, I now own three companies, all
of which, I'm proud to say, are very successful. My demands are huge. Not only am I on
the road, but I'm on the phone from, usually,
5:00 AM till 8:00 PM, right? I'm constantly
working with clients. I'm talking. It's very central
nervous system intensive. I tried to sustain my CrossFit
volume for a very long time. What I found out was
I was very tired. My quality of work sucked. My quality of sleep sucked. I lost my sex drive and
my personal life sucked. That's just the truth. So then you get in this
entrepreneurial environment, and everyone's like, oh. Well, that's just what happens
when you're an entrepreneur. You got to make
those sacrifices. The reality is I
was over-training. So now my routine is
that I do power-lifting three days a week, right? I still do the
movements that are the biggest bang for my buck. I squat, I bench, I dead a lot. I don't do a lot
of technical work like power cleans
or power snatches because they're very
nervous-system intensive. I don't want to do
the technical work. And then I try to
get in some sort of anaerobic or aerobic piece
one to two times per week. That's what my
routine looks like. So a lot of what I'm looking
at now is maintenance. I'm a competitive
dude, so I like to see if I can push the
limits on my lifting. So within the context
of squatting, benching, and dead-lifting, I am always
trying to lift heavier. And so currently,
I would categorize what I'm doing as daily
undulating periodization, but that's neither
here nor there. But the crux of it
is power-lifting. Good? In terms of stress, a lot of the
reasons that most people here don't see results--
they're overstressed. If you think of
stress like a glass, we've got a 14-ounce glass. Everybody wakes up
with that glass full, to a certain degree. For me, I'm probably filling 13
to 14 with my day-to-day life. I have very little
that I can add on top before I stop seeing results. But as soon as that stress
glass starts to overfill, your body will shut down
and go into survival mode. What is survival
mode to your body? Hold onto body fat,
stop metabolic function, stop performance. Stop all of the things
that we're looking at by going into the gym. Decrease favorable
body composition. So if we're over-stressing
the body, over-training, not eating enough, not
sleeping enough, trying to take on too much work,
we're also setting back our physical goals. So some people are like,
oh, you're doing too much. Well, sometimes
that's appropriate. You have to really look at what
your output versus your intake is. How can we offset stress? Sometimes that's caloric intake. Sometimes we simply
need to eat more. Sometimes eating more
is not going to fix it. Sometimes we have to
stop doing so much. Sometimes we have to start
prioritizing our sleep. Sometimes we have to start
prioritizing our workouts like I had to do. Pull back on the
intensity and the volume. Does that make sense on stress? It's really oversimplified,
but I recognize we're running tight on time. Does that make sense on
stress, whoever asked that? Metabolic adaptation--
that's the biggest one that I want to touch
on, and I see somebody asked about sugar alcohols. Metabolic adaptation
is the biggest thing I see wrong in
our society today. In most media, we're told,
eat less, eat less, eat less. That has resulted
in what we've all read about in articles
where it says, well, you're going to have
metabolic damage. And so we've all
heard, you're supposed to eat more to lose weight. The problem becomes, if we
live in this low-calorie state for a super long time, our body
adapts to living like that. So if we're eating 800,
1,000 calories per day, your body learns
to function there. Well, how does it learn
to function there? It learns to stop
burning fat, it learns to stop burning
anything, and it learns to hoard everything, right? Think about it like
a bum on the street. How does a bum learn to adapt? It learns how to
survive on the street and it learns how to hoard
every single thing that comes to it because
it knows it has a finite source of resources. Well, your body looks
at it that way as well. So your body-- in 800
to 1,000 calories, theoretically, it's
in a calorie deficit. It should be losing weight. But instead, it's
adapted to living. Now we have to go
through a process known as reverse dieting, and
that can really suck. I just wrote an article on it. There's three outcomes
of a reverse diet. One, you can gain weight. As you start adding calories
from a low-calorie state, you absolutely can gain weight. But I'm very blunt
with my clients that are in a reverse diet state. You did that. Nobody put a gun to
your head and said, you have to eat 800 calories
a day for months and years at a time. You decided to listen to the
media, albeit uninformed media. And you made the
decision to only consume that amount of calories and
do X, Y, Z hours of cardio. Now we have to fix that. You lost the right to lose fat. That's the truth. All right? Another option of
a reverse diet is you really don't see
any weight fluctuation. And while that's great, I
know most people are like, oh, I wish I could
lose fat right away, At Least you're not gaining
weight in the process. The third option is we have
hyper-responders out there. Those are those lucky
people that, you start adding calories back in, boom-- their weight
responds right away. The body's like, oh, I'm
finally getting what I need. I can resume metabolic activity. I'm going to start losing fat. The problem is, before we
get into that reverse diet scenario, before we start
fixing metabolic adaptation, we don't know which
one you're going to be. But what we do know is you
have to get your calories back to normal. Until we get your calories
back to a maintenance level, until we restore
metabolic function, you will never get
the results you want from a dietary process, period. Any questions on that? I don't know if that was one
on or if somebody asked that. But I hope that
answers that question. [INAUDIBLE] What's that? AUDIENCE: If you're going to
be the type to gain weight, is that just a
period of time where you'll gain for a few
months and then probably-- JASON PHILLIPS: I'll give you
the most-- the question is, if you're the type that's
going to gain weight, is that just a couple months? Is it a year? I'll give you the
most extreme case that I've ever worked with. I worked with a woman-- we had to reverse diet her. It took 20 months. That's a year and 10 months,
or a year and 8 months is what we went. She gained weight
the whole time. Mind you, it was
very small, right? I think net gain in 20
months was 9 or 10 pounds. It wasn't a ton, but we
did it incrementally. We did it really, really small. And my hat's off to her. She was super, super
patient with me. But we got to that point. We knew her metabolism
was fixed and we started the downward process. As we started the downward
process, over the course of-- now we're 13 months-- we're a pound away
from her all-time goal from when she started with me. So I took her 10 pounds higher,
and now I've effectively taken her to a net loss, to
where she's almost where she wanted to be when she hired me. Now, had I never taken
her 10 pounds higher, she never would be
where she is today. She could have tried
every fad under the sun, every cleanse under the sun,
every paleo, Whole30, carb cycling, whatever, and
it would have actually made her more broken. And it would have prolonged
that 20-month period. Does that make sense? The problem is, it sucks to
go through that, and I get it. It's the worst
thing in the world. As somebody that gets
people results for a living, I wish I could say to you, hey,
I'm going to snap my fingers and give you results tomorrow. It just doesn't work like that. I would argue 60% of
the population today is slightly broken because
of the dietary protocols that have been put out there,
because of the lack of quantity emphasis on people. Does that make sense? Does that answer the question? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: The
question-- that, actually, translating into
calorie spiking-- basically, this was a reference
to a seventh day high calorie, or non-tracking, or
cheat day of sorts. Actually, this is going to
prevent metabolic adaptation to a large degree. So even if you did eat the-- I've referenced 500 calories a
day, Monday through Saturday. By going really
far over on Sunday, you're sending the
signal to your body, hey, there is an adequate
source of food intake at least once per week. I'm not going to go into
that starvation mode. Is this appropriate
right off the bat? No, I don't think so. I also think it creates a really
poor mental state with food. What happens from
Monday to Saturday is you start looking
forward to that Sunday. All of the social things, all
of your mindset around Monday through Saturday start going
out the window because all you can wait for is Sunday
morning when you get to go have pancakes,
Sunday night when you get to have cheesecake,
whatever else it may be. So I really don't think it's
the best way to go about it. I think that there are
certain applications to cheat meals and cheat days. But it takes somebody
that's very mentally strong and you really
have to understand the whole context of the person
before you get into that. That make sense to everybody? Yeah? AUDIENCE: Calorie
spiking goes along the same lines as carb loading? JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. The question is calorie
spiking and carb loading. It's really a
stimulation of leptin. We know that any dietary
protocol, any calorie deficit, is going to create a decrease
in metabolic hormones. Leptin will down-regulate. Ghrelin will down-regulate. Active thyroid conversion from
T4 to T3 will down-regulate. That's just the facts of
living in a calorie deficit. But by taking in
more carbohydrates, it will re-stimulate
leptin levels. It'll bring that
metabolic activity back up to where it should be. And then you can resume
your calorie deficit. Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: Now,
specifically, you asked carb loading. There are studies that
show carbohydrates are more impactful on leptin
than overall calorie balance. So that's why you start to
see high-carb days favored more than high-calorie days. AUDIENCE: In terms
of performance, would you say, for
marathon runners, they go, say, six days
of eating regular food, and then they carb
load for the final day? JASON PHILLIPS: Mm-hmm. AUDIENCE: In terms
of performance, wouldn't that be
pretty detrimental, because they're
not used to having such a high level of
carbohydrates to deal with? JASON PHILLIPS: The
question is, would that be detrimental to an athlete-- say, an endurance
runner-- six days, normal carb, one day, high
carb for a loading principle. A, I would switch that load
to a 48-hour load that's a little bit more balanced. I don't think a
seventh-day, one-load-- it's not going to give
you enough glycogen to run on anyway. Glycogen re-synthesizes
at a 24-to-36-hour rate, so that's really-- you would
need a 48-hour load for it to really be effective. The other thing
you've got to remember is, assuming days
one through six are not in a calorie deficit,
that seventh day is just keeping you in a surplus. You're not going to get
that same leptin spike because leptin's already high. You're not in a calorie deficit
Monday through Saturday, so we haven't
down-regulated leptin. You're not going to
get that same spike. AUDIENCE: What's the benefit
or purpose of leptin? JASON PHILLIPS:
Leptin regulates-- it's a master hormone. It's a master
regulator in the body. It regulates all
metabolic function, right? So if you think of your
body as a thermostat, we want you at 70 degrees
and you put it down to 65. Or it's 65 degrees
outside, rather. Your body fights to
heat up the room. Leptin is your ability
to heat up the room. Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah, it does. JASON PHILLIPS:
Question on fruit. Fruit, the primary sugar
in fruit is fructose. The problem is fructose
is stored preferentially in the liver. Fruit will never make you fat. The one time I would not choose
fruit as a carbohydrate source is post-workout. When you're training,
you're depleting muscle glycogen. You want to
replenish that muscle glycogen. That's going to come more
directly from glucose. However, I've never seen any
substantial amount of fruit, when calorie controlled,
that has made you fat. Is it favorable for
body composition at high concentrations? Empirically, I can say no. I don't think anyone here is
trying to be a bodybuilder, so I'm not even going to go down
that road and go super deep. But the myth that fruit
is going to make you fat is just that, it's a myth. Make sense? Did you have a specific
question on fruit, or-- AUDIENCE: No, I
just want somebody to confirm what I always
felt when I heard that. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. It's a great source
of micronutrients. Again, as we shift towards
the food quality spectrum, you're not trying
to be a bodybuilder. You're not trying
to get on a stage. There's health
benefits to fruit-- high antioxidant value,
high micronutrient value. I wouldn't make it your only
source of carbohydrates. I think that, at
that point, you're getting one simple
chain of sugars and I think it should
be very diverse. I also think that
you're not going to get enough fiber, unless
you're eating only raspberries. But I think that there's
really nothing wrong, assuming it's all controlled. I think, again, it's just fear
mongering in the media, right? But they have an agenda. They gotta sell
you something else. Let's see. Meal timing, pre-
and post-workout. Before you train,
for most people, I like to see your
pre-workout meal-- I talked earlier,
eating something on the way to the gym, it's
not really usable fuel. I like to see it closer to
90 minutes to 2 hours out. It's really more about blood
sugar regulation at that point. I like to see a relatively
balanced meal, primarily protein-carbohydrate. If you're having fat, it
should be a super small amount. Most people are going to
do well with just proteins and carbohydrates,
no added fats. Added fats are going
to delay digestion. They're going to sit a little
heavier in your stomach. You want to be slightly
closer to fasted. That's going to allow
cortisol elevation. Cortisol, as we
talked about earlier, allows for mobilization of
stored protein, carbs, and fats to help you burn fat. So it's going to create a
positive hormonal environment for you to train in. Post-workout, it's very
dependent on what your training age is, what your level
of performance is. You're going to have anywhere
from something as simple as a protein shake, to a
protein-carbohydrate shake, to a high ratio of carbohydrates
to protein in your shake. That's going to
depend on who you are. I would say 90% of
people should look for some sort of
protein-carbohydrate within 30 minutes of
finishing their training. And that would be a
really general statement. If someone has more
specific questions, they can feel free to ask me
and I will get that to them. But I know we're
running short on time so I'm trying to get
through that one. Someone asked me, what
about sugar alcohols found in tons of protein shakes? I don't know many protein
shakes that have sugar alcohols. I know a lot of protein bars
that have sugar alcohols. I'm assuming that
is, do they need to be counted in
carbohydrate intake? The answer is yes, they do. They may not directly
impact your blood sugar. They are still carbohydrate. So if you're in a
ketogenic state, maybe you don't count them
towards your net carbs for ketogenic balance. But in terms of overall
carbohydrate intake, you absolutely do. AUDIENCE: Can you do organic? JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah, last
one, I think, is organic. AUDIENCE: Yeah. You talked about
quality already. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah. Organic is relatively simple. I think that it's-- because of the laws, I don't
think that the same application today is like when the
conversation around it first came out. If you look at this line
right here on the stage, this side could be
organic and this side could be non-organic
by what we're using, in terms of pesticides,
fertilizer, et cetera. But what's to say that it's
not windy this day, when I'm spraying fertilizers here,
and it doesn't over-spray over here? But by law, I sprayed this
side with no fertilizers, so it's organic. How do you really
know it's organic? AUDIENCE: You don't. JASON PHILLIPS: You don't. So my recommendation has always
been, if you have the money and it's something that you
can afford, buy organic. We always want to buy the
highest quality possible. Even if there's
some risk, and we don't have scientific
data that proves that there's risk on
fertilizers and pesticides yet-- we don't. It's just not out
there, empirically. It really hasn't been around. The conversation hasn't
been around long enough for us to show
long-term effects. But even if there's
some risk, I think we should avoid it if
it fits into our budget. If it doesn't fit into your
budget, don't stress it. I haven't seen an
autopsy that says, cause of death,
eating non-organic. I haven't seen it happen yet. And if someone has,
please let me know. Does that makes sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah. For me, it does. JASON PHILLIPS: Someone
else asked organic. Does that answer the question? Or perhaps they had to leave. I'm sorry. AUDIENCE: Are there
pesticides and stuff that can be used on organic? It's not just a
complete outright-- JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah, I
believe that there are. I haven't gone deep
enough in the research to know exactly
what can categorize organic versus non-organic. That would be somebody
more in a clinical setting, a registered dietitian. That's not a route that I
really wanted to go down. It's not one, truthfully,
that I care enough about. I really-- I don't have any--
even my Olympic athletes, we try to eat organic because,
typically, their food is provided for them. And we leave it at that. My average person, I'm not
advocating it for them. They're already spending
money on working with me. They're spending
money on a trainer. They're spending money
on whatever else. I think, first, let's dial
in total quantity of food. Then let's worry about quality. And then from there, if
that quality is really good, now let's get organic quality. But I think it's so far down the
list towards what the goal is. So I think that's
usually my hierarchy. Does that help? AUDIENCE: Yeah, it does. JASON PHILLIPS: And
then the last one is red meat and total quantity. I think, again,
that's fear mongering. I actually think that-- we
talked about the omega-3, 6, 9 profile of chicken. I actually think-- the
fat profile of red meat is favorable,
compared to chicken. I think that a lot
of people think, oh, I'm going to get
really high cholesterol, or I'm going to get--
it's too much fat. Really, unless you've
got prostate cancer, you shouldn't really
avoid red meat. We do have studies that show
red meat exacerbates and creates an environment for certain
cancers to thrive in. Prostate's on the top
of my mind because I have a family member that
just was diagnosed with it. But I think that most of this
is very much fear mongering. I don't think it should be
your only source of protein, but I don't think there's any
protein out there that should be your only source of protein. I think that you
should always try to eat a wide variety of foods. So if you're going to
have red meat twice, then have chicken
or turkey once. If you're going
to have eggs once, red meat once,
white meat once, I think that's a really
good way to go. Try to vary your
protein sources, but also try to vary your
starches, vary your vegetables. Try to get an array of
amino acids taken in. Try to get an array
of carbohydrates. Then you're really going to get
a complete spectrum of aminos, micros, macros. Everything is going to
be taken in and balanced. And at the end of the day,
it's all about balance. Does that answer the
red meat question? Good-- yeah, of course. AUDIENCE: Just generally
speaking, as far as preparation-- grilled
versus stir fried versus steamed or whatever. As far as red meat goes,
that's what we hear most about, where charred red meat is super
bad for you versus stir fried is less bad for you, whatever. So I'm curious to hear
your thoughts on that. JASON PHILLIPS: The question
is the way it's prepared. In all fairness, I
haven't heard that. Where are you reading that? AUDIENCE: Just whenever
you put a char on anything, it creates carcinogenic
properties or [INAUDIBLE]. JASON PHILLIPS: Sure. And that's potentially--
but I think that would be more on
char, in and of itself, not relative to red meat
being prepared that way. I think it's any meal
using char, right? And that's where they're saying,
because of the source of that, that there's potential
carcinogenic properties. I would agree with that. There's some research out
there that supports that. I don't think there's
enough to truly validate it, but I think that
there's some that people have tried to prove it. But I don't think, when
it comes down to red meat, that preparation-- I've seen any good or bad ways. The same thing with temperature. We could argue that all day. I don't think that's as
important as a lot of people like to make it out to be. But remember, a lot of things
are written with agendas too. I really make it a point
that everything I talk about is science-backed
and evidence-based. I spend a lot of time
researching on things. All studies are
performed with an agenda. There was a study,
recently, on a supplement called HMB free acid. And it said it
would do everything, short of curing cancer. It was like the golden thing
in the supplement industry. One of my buddies sent it to me. So I started looking at
it, and it was funded by a company out of Canada. Well, that company
out of Canada happens to be the one company that uses
HMB free acid on the market. So of course they're going
to make the study look, and they set the study up to
prove all of these things. So you look for multiple
studies that show that. It didn't happen. Now you realize it's not truth. So when you start
looking into science and you start looking
at these things, make sure it's repeated. Make sure that it's
truly supported and it's actually happened
numerous times, not just one time. Make sense? AUDIENCE: Yeah. JASON PHILLIPS: Cool, I think
that answered everything. Sorry I got really
quick at the end. Yeah? AUDIENCE: Alcohol. JASON PHILLIPS: Oh, alcohol. Damn, I thought I was going
to get away from that. Alcohol is really simple. I always like to say
we're all adults. We all make our own decisions. I recognize that,
for most people, alcohol fits into
their lifestyle. It's not my job to tell you
to drink or to not drink. But it is my job to let you know
how it's going to affect you. Alcohol delays what's called
priority of metabolism. So when you go and
you have a drink, your body recognizes
alcohol as a toxin. Proteins and carbohydrates
have four calories per gram. Fats have nine
calories per gram. Alcohol has seven
calories per gram. Your body really doesn't
recognize the number seven at all. So it's like, oh my
gosh, what is this? Get it out of me. And everything else shuts down
while the alcohol metabolism takes place. However, while
that's taking place and everything
else is shut down, it's creating an environment
where that food is then stored as fat. At some point, it has to
be metabolized or stored. Instead of being metabolized
and used for energy, it's actually being
stored as fat. So it's not the alcohol,
in and of itself. It's the food prior to
consumption or the food during consumption of
the alcoholic beverages. So the question,
then, is asked, how do we have alcohol in
balance with lifestyle? And the two hacks that I
give everybody are simple-- keep it to one night per week. And I've not seen one client,
when they keep it to one night per week, that
cannot have results. So does that mean one
drink, one night per week, or a whole liter
one night per week? The results will
be no different, as sad as that sounds. I don't care if it's 10 drinks. I don't care if it's one drink. The reality is, the
calorie difference will be so negligible, relative
to the impact of one day, that it really doesn't matter. It's that window of
time that is much more impactful than the overall
consumption of the alcohol. The other is, don't consume
a lot of dietary fat when consuming alcohol. Because if you do get
that alcohol metabolized and your body does resume
metabolizing the food that's there, it needs
the items that are faster and easier
to metabolize, which are proteins and carbohydrates. Fats are slower to digest,
as we talked about earlier. So eat lower-fat meals around
the times that you're drinking. I have several data
points to suggest that. And based on what I said,
people are like, oh, so one drink every other night-- that can't be that bad. It's just one. It's actually that
consumption so frequently that is really bad. I would rather see
you get bombed out of your mind on Saturday night,
not remember the night at all, and I guarantee you your
results would be better in a seven-day
window than if you had one drink every other
night throughout the course of the week. We could almost chart it. If you looked at
it, here's Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday,
Thursday, Friday, Saturday. If you consume alcohol here on
Sunday, what's going to happen? You're going to see the
scale go down on Monday, and then the scale is going to-- this marker's dying on me. You're going to see the
scale go back up on Tuesday. You're going to see it
go up again on Wednesday. We know this just-- I have thousands of
data points on it. So if we have alcohol here,
and it goes down here, and then we have
it here, while it's trying to go up, instead
of going down the next day, it comes up again. But remember, alcohol
consumption here causes weight gain again
here, weight gain again there. And then alcohol consumption
here causes the weight gain here and, subsequently,
again here. You see why we're gaining
weight over time with alcohol. Whereas, hey, you should get
it all in here, one night. Whatever happens here,
here, and here, no big deal. Because then here,
we can see the scale go back down and achieving
net loss for the week. And if we start looking at
things on seven-day windows and we're achieving net
loss on seven-day windows, in a 365-day window,
we're seeing weight loss. AUDIENCE: What if your goal is
maintenance, not weight loss? Sorry. JASON PHILLIPS:
Two days per week? AUDIENCE: I could get
on board with that. JASON PHILLIPS: Yeah? That's probably what
I would tell you. There's probably a way-- and again, without
knowing much about you, there's probably a way we
could fit it in more than that, truth be told. AUDIENCE: Great. JASON PHILLIPS: It would take
an individual application. But it's creating an environment
where fat gain is likely. I'll say that. And that's what we would
have to circumvent. It definitely would
not be an environment where fat loss is likely. Yeah, go for it. AUDIENCE: Do you suggest
that all the alcohol is the same, as opposed to a
beer, to a wine, to a spirit? JASON PHILLIPS:
Emperically, I've actually seen-- the question
is, is all the alcohol the same, from beer, to wine, to liquor? Empirically, I've actually
seen beer be the worst. I don't have data as to why. If I had to guess, I would
look at what's already happening internally,
metabolically speaking, combined with gluten. And when we look at a lower
metabolic response combined with something
like gluten that's not very tolerable
by most people, it's really creating
a gnarly environment, and we're seeing
more weight gain. Again that's purely conjecture. That's not science-based. That's just, again, what
I've seen over time. I think that the old adage of
clear liquors and red wines holds to be fairly true. Yeah. AUDIENCE: Can you talk about the
effects of diet soda, as well? JASON PHILLIPS: In terms of? AUDIENCE: Are there effects
besides the use of aspartame-- JASON PHILLIPS: The
question is on diet soda and if there's any effects. I think that what the media
is trying to say right now is that the
sweetener is creating an insulin-type
response in your body and that because
your mind senses that something is so
sweet, that it's actually increasing insulin levels, which
is an environment to store. Insulin is a storage hormone. I have yet to see
that be true in true peer-reviewed literature. Now, the people that support
the banning of sweeteners and the people that
hate sweeteners-- those people, in
their fear mongering, they're going to run
around and they're going to publish all these studies. And they're going
to tell you it's the worst thing in the world. And they're going
to tell you you're going to die because of it. The same thing. I haven't seen an
autopsy that says, cause of death, pesticides. I haven't seen one that
says, cause of death, sweetener from soda. So there's really
no studies that show that any sweetener
is super bad for you. I would argue there's just as
many studies that show that-- because the two big ones
are sucralose and stevia. There's just as
many studies that show the negative effects
of sucralose, as are stevia. So you've got people that
jump on either bandwagon. They're going to
vigorously support their side of the fence. That's just what
people inherently do. The data doesn't support
or refute either one. So my recommendation to
clients is, don't stress it. AUDIENCE: Can you
briefly-- moving away from drinks in general,
can you talk a little bit about the best ways
to track your macros, track your calories? I know MyFitnessPal
is a very popular one, but it's also super annoying
because what you're eating isn't really what you're
listing on MyFitnessPal unless it's literally
portioned out and you know the exact oatmeal
box you got it from, whatever. What's the-- you travel a lot. I know you probably
eyeball it because you've gotten really good at it. Can you talk briefly
about some of the ways, for those of us who are a
little bit, I don't know, maybe a little lazy to open up
MyFitnessPal three times a day and mark everything
you eat, et cetera? JASON PHILLIPS: Sure. Number one, are we good on time? Because we're-- since
we're already going over, are we good to keep going? Yeah? One minute, OK. One minute. The question is,
how do we track? How do we loosely track? How do we get away from
the neuroses provided by something like MyFitnessPal? The reality is MyFitnessPal
should be a tool. It should not be
one that you plan to use for your whole life. But I would say
it's one that you need to use in the
beginning to create an environment of tracking. If I told you today
that you had to eyeball and it had to be within
like a 1-ounce accuracy, could you do it? The answer is probably-- AUDIENCE: I think I could,
but I probably couldn't. JASON PHILLIPS:
Right, you probably could not, as much as you
would like to think so. However, after 60 to
90 days of tracking, I bet you probably could. So if you start thinking
of it as a tool where I'm going to build knowledge-- I'm going to learn knowledge
so that, long term, I can have success. I would start
re-framing it like that. I would argue there's no way to
get around tracking initially because we're just not born
with the inherent ability to eyeball something and
know the exact weight or the exact portion size. I also think, like
I mentioned earlier, it's a really good
tool to create habits. So for myself, being on the
road a lot, when I'm at home, I work on understanding
what my habits are. My breakfast is
usually some sort of combo of protein
and carbohydrates. My lunch is some sort of combo
of protein and carbohydrates. So when I'm on the road,
I'm not necessarily concerned about the
portion size as much as pairing those
food groups together. I know by satiety what
I should be eating, and I also do
eyeball, to an extent. Is it perfect? No, and I would argue that my
results from being on the road are not perfect. But they're a lot
better than if I didn't have any sort of concept
from having previously tracked. And when I'm home,
I track vigorously. That make sense? AUDIENCE: Through MyFitnessPal. JASON PHILLIPS:
Through MyFitnessPal. Yep. AUDIENCE: OK, so
there's no fist, hand-- JASON PHILLIPS: No. No. Because our fists
are a different size. AUDIENCE: Yeah. But our bodies are
different sizes. JASON PHILLIPS: That's true. But I don't think that
the fist-sized protein-- my fist was this size
when I was 118 pounds. Does that mean it's appropriate
to me at 190 pounds now? So I just don't think
those arguments hold up. I think they're very
simplistic for general-- again, if you take somebody
that's over-eating, and you tell them,
limit something to the size of their fist,
now what have you done? You've created a
calorie deficit. But you're not at a point
where huge changes have to take place. You're looking for
smaller changes to move you closer to
a more precise goal. The more precision of your
goal, the more precision you have to act with. AUDIENCE: I think there's a good
business opportunity to come up with a way where it's like, no
matter where you are, no matter what food's served to you--
whether it's the Google cafeteria or the hotel
you're staying at, somehow you know the exact
makeup of what you're eating. JASON PHILLIPS:
Yeah, it's called a-- it's a pocket-size
food scale. They look like little
drug dealer scales. Maybe that's where they
started, but I can attest. I have several
high-level athletes that travel with pocket-size scales. AUDIENCE: But there's just
a lot of stuff [? in this ?] particular meal, so it's
hard to [INAUDIBLE]. JASON PHILLIPS: I
would actually argue-- if we were really
having this conversation and you were a client of
mine, I would tell you that your head is letting it
go way deeper than it really is, because it takes about five
seconds to weigh something. So if you actually
pulled that scale out, and you put the food on
there, and it said 10 ounces, and you only needed
five, cut it in half. Boom, start eating. How hard was that? AUDIENCE: Right. I'm thinking of more
prepared things. Think about lasagna. It's got meat, it's got carbs,
it's got all that stuff. Just weighing it
isn't going to be-- JASON PHILLIPS: And that's
where you would use-- you would pull
something like lasagna from somewhere in MyFitnessPal. Use that same one
every single time. Choose one serving. It's all done. And that margin of error now
becomes a constant variable that you're always
operating with. Good? I'm getting a flashing red
light, so I'd better stop. Thank you guys
all for coming in. Everyone that did,
everyone that watched. Thank you guys
for having me out. I hope I answered
your questions. [APPLAUSE]
