 |
| You are not authorized to post a reply.
|
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/15/2009 6:21 PM |
|
I am posting this as its own thread based on a suggestion that cranberrycat made to me about reposting some of what I had written in other threads about the whole ATP v. Calories debate. It is my belief that when we talk about energy requirements, it doesn't matter whether we are talking about calories or the amount of ATP that can be generated from them, since they are really the same thing. There has been a lot of discussion here of late about the claim that fat produces 3x the amount of ATP as carbohydrates and this is why fat is "high octane fuel" and carbohydrates are "low octane fuel". On this basis, we are told that it is ATP that matters and not calories. This assertion is often bandied about as a reason why an athlete following the Zone should be able to produce enough energy for gaining muscle, even in a large calorie restricted environment, because he or she will get enough ATP from fats even if he isn't getting that much in the way of calories. These assertions seem to come from Dr. Sears' book "Toxic Fat" at page 27 where he wrote: "One gram of fat can make three times more ATP than one gram of carbohydrate. This is why I consider stored fat high-octane fuel, and stored carbohydrate low-octane fuel." The first thing I want to point out is that Dr. Sears is comparing GRAMS not calories. As we know, one gram of fat contains more calories than one gram of carbohydrate. Although we tend to round the calories per gram to the nearest whole number, from what I have been able to find, a gram of carbohydrate actually a little less than 4 calories per gram and a gram of fat is slightly more than 9 calories/gram. Turns out the ratio of calories per gram is actually about 2.4 F:C. Now, in poking around on the net, I found out that a gram of glucose oxidizes to produce 0.2 moles of ATP and a gram of fat oxidizes to produce 0.49 moles of ATP. What is that ratio? Turns out this ratio is about 2.4-2.5. Pretty damned close to what the ratio for calories per gram is. So it looks like fat is high octane fuel in the sense that an equal quantity produces more ATP than an equal quantity of carbohydrate, but to the extent it is meant to imply that 100 CALORIES (not grams) of fat produces more ATP than 100 CALORIES (not grams) of carbohydrate, it appears from what I have been able to find, that this is dead wrong. So, if you are eating a calorie-restricted diet, even if it is high in fat, IT IS ALSO AN ATP RESTRICTED DIET. The ratio between the calories contained in a gram of carbohydrate as compared with the calories contained in a gram of fat is pretty close to identical to the ratio between ATP that can be produced by each. So the upshot is that talking in terms of calories is just another way of talking in terms of ATP and there is really no substantive difference between the two. On a calorie per calorie basis, fat and carbs produce the same amount of ATP in the body when oxidized. |
|
|
|
|
Cranberrycat  Posts:5313
 Zone Expert

 |
| 04/15/2009 7:30 PM |
|
Thanks for posting that, Matt! I think it is an interesting point. It was discussed in another thread, but basically lost in that thread, so I am glad that you made it it's own topic. From what I have read in Zone books, I was led to believe that fat produces more ATP than carbs do, as you state in your post. I had never taken the time to do the math--just accepted this as a fact. |
|
Cranberrycat
We don't own the earth; we borrow it from our children.
|
|
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/15/2009 7:56 PM |
|
Thanks CC. I almost never take anything at face value. Even when an "authority" claims something is true, I want them to prove it to me. And to me, there is a particularly high onus of proof when someone claims something as fact that flies in the face of what has generally been accepted as being true. The idea that an already lean person could gain substantial quantities on a calorie-restricted diet, so long as it is a "Zone" diet simply because it is relatively high in fat struck me as one such claim that simply didn't jibe with what I knew and what I saw in the real world and required proof. So, I started searching for this proof in various biochem sources throughout the web, and what I have arrived at from my search (unless I am missing something) is that the claim being made about fat being a "high-octane fuel" (at least on a calorie per calorie basis) cannot hold up to scrutiny. You and I have both discussed before that neither of us like to take things on blind faith. We want to see proof. I feel the same way about the claim that high insulin levels are necessarily a bad thing. Whether you agree with me on the insulin issue or not, I think you encountered some frustrations getting a straight answer from Zone Labs for evidence to support their assertions about raising insulin levels being a bad thing (even following intense training). |
|
|
|
|
sue  Posts:263
 Zoner
 |
| 04/15/2009 8:51 PM |
|
Matt/CC - thanks for this thread. Very interesting indeed. So if I read this right Matt, your assertion that adding a block or just adding fat would have the same effect?
While reading Grants thread, I agreed, while I didn't post, that he was consuming too few calories. I wanted to see where the thread went and the discussion was good, so I didn't want to interrupt.
Thanks for all the research. |
|
sue
I don't know about the future, but I know who holds the future.... |
|
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/15/2009 9:23 PM |
|
So if I read this right Matt, your assertion that adding a block or just adding fat would have the same effect?
Actually, that is not quite the point of this thread, although this thread is a necessary step in making the argument about how much to eat. My point had more to do with the assertion that total calories don't matter in the Zone because you get all the ATP you need from fat, even in a reduced calorie diet. My point is that this is wrong. If your caloric requirements are 3,200 calories according to one of the various calorie calculators, they are STILL 3,200 calories if you are using the Zone (I choose 3,200 calories because that happens to be my approximate caloric requirements according to most calculators). Now, I am not saying that it doesn't matter what you eat to get to 3,200 calories. Quality matters. Ratios matter. Hormones matter. Inflammation matters. Insulin matters.
So, assuming you are fairly lean and no longer in fat loss mode and are looking to either stabilize your body weight or add body weight through increased muscle mass, you need to increase your calories for that purpose. The question becomes what to fill those calories with. That is a related, but slightly different, discussion.
There are differing views on that. The Zone method is to fill those extra calories with fat. For most people, that is probably the right answer. For people trying to put on muscle or serious athletes, I would argue that there are better and more effective methods of getting those extra calories that will provide more energy, allow for better performance, and build muscle faster. I have discussed some of those strategies on other threads, but the upshot is, no, I don't think (at least for strength/power athletes training intensely with weights) that adding fat blocks or adding additional total blocks are equal in terms of effective way to get those calories. |
|
|
|
|
Cranberrycat  Posts:5313
 Zone Expert

 |
| 04/15/2009 9:46 PM |
|
There are many references that are cited in Sears' books, but it would take me quite awhile to sort through it and try to figure out which reference applies to this or that. I wish that there were some footnotes in the books, so that one could go straight to the reference to find the evidence. So, when I had asked for references via email, I was under the assumption that it would be quite an easy task for the staff to just point to the topic and give me a reference to it. Hmmm, I guess not quite as easy as that. BTW, I should tell you that I persisted and had again asked for help in finding these references. So, guess what? An email showed up just recently with a few articles cited! But, don't get too excited. The articles are pretty old, and they really don't cover the issue that I was asking about. |
|
Cranberrycat
We don't own the earth; we borrow it from our children.
|
|
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/15/2009 9:53 PM |
|
Hmmmmm...
Maybe that should tell us something... |
|
|
|
|
Sue K  Posts:8673
 Zone Expert

 |
| 04/15/2009 10:21 PM |
|
Hi Matt, re "So, assuming you are fairly lean and no longer in fat loss mode and are looking to either stabilize your body weight or add body weight through increased muscle mass, you need to increase your calories for that purpose. The question becomes what to fill those calories with. That is a related, but slightly different, discussion. There are differing views on that. The Zone method is to fill those extra calories with fat." I've never seen Barry Sears recommending adding fat to build muscle. Where are you getting that info from? Just wondering. Thanks! And, BTW, on the ATP and calorie thing, you're missing something. Enough said. I'll let you figure it out. I'm not interested in debate. |
|
sue
Lost 100 lbs 14 yrs ago, off BP meds, thanks to the Zone diet and Zone fish oil!
To view my before/after pics and meal photos scroll over this picture and click when the link appears.
 |
|
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/15/2009 11:16 PM |
|
Sue:
Instead of being cryptic, why not tell me what I am missing? I genuinely want to know. Everything I have read on the subject leads me to the conclusion that a calorie's worth of body fat and a calorie's worth of carbohydrate in the body oxidize to produce almost exactly the same amount of ATP. If there is something you know, and I am missing, then just tell me what it is.
Also, I never claimed that Dr. Sears said that muscle is built from fat. What I said is that the EXTRA CALORIE REQUIREMENTS are filled by fat -- i.e., the recommendation that athletes in the Zone eat 2-3x the fat blocks. Obviously, protein is what builds muscle, but in a calorie deficit, protein is forced to be used as a very inefficient source of energy instead of to build muscle tissue. |
|
|
|
|
Cranberrycat  Posts:5313
 Zone Expert

 |
| 04/15/2009 11:36 PM |
|
Matt, I think it is pretty clear to me that you are not suggesting using fat to build LBM. Going back to the other thread, it is obvious that you feel that if one is trying to build LBM, that he/she should increase the protein requirement. The calorie deficit that you are talking about is from the strenuous activity that it takes to build that LBM. The energy (ATP) either needs to come from fat or from carbs, if I am understanding you correctly. ***** So, that leaves us to the question that I am also curious about, what is wrong with Matt's numbers? ***** Sue, it would be very nice of you to enlighten us, rather than to let this whole thing drag on. We are all here to learn. You certainly don't want to see fellow zoners be misinformed, do you? |
|
Cranberrycat
We don't own the earth; we borrow it from our children.
|
|
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/16/2009 1:43 AM |
|
If I am wrong, I am wrong. If there is some factor I am not taking into account then so be it. I am not posting to win some Internet message board debating competition (despite all the fame and glory that go with it -- LOL). I am here in search for answers. If the answer I have arrived at is wrong, I would like to know where I went wrong.
I freely admit I am not a biochemist or a nutritionist. The last science course I took was in my Freshman year of college and the last chemistry course I took was in high school. So maybe I am not understanding the biochemistry textbooks I have referenced, or there is another factor at play that I am not considering, or the biochemistry textbooks are wrong. But telling me I am wrong and to go figure it without more out when I already have tried to figure it out and came to the conclusion I set forth above isn't particularly helpful in terms of correcting my error (if I have indeed made one). |
|
|
|
|
sue  Posts:263
 Zoner
 |
| 04/16/2009 7:12 AM |
|
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Sue on 04/15/2009 10:21 PM I've never seen Barry Sears recommending adding fat to build muscle. Where are you getting that info from? Just wondering. Thanks! And, BTW, on the ATP and calorie thing, you're missing something. Enough said. I'll let you figure it out. I'm not interested in debate.</div> <div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Matthew on 04/15/2009 11:16 PM Sue: Instead of being cryptic, why not tell me what I am missing? I genuinely want to know. Everything I have read on the subject leads me to the conclusion that a calorie's worth of body fat and a calorie's worth of carbohydrate in the body oxidize to produce almost exactly the same amount of ATP. If there is something you know, and I am missing, then just tell me what it is. Also, I never claimed that Dr. Sears said that muscle is built from fat. What I said is that the EXTRA CALORIE REQUIREMENTS are filled by fat -- i.e., the recommendation that athletes in the Zone eat 2-3x the fat blocks. Obviously, protein is what builds muscle, but in a calorie deficit, protein is forced to be used as a very inefficient source of energy instead of to build muscle tissue.</div> Sue - I would like to know what Matt is missing as well. The thing that bugs me is, it has been recommended over and over to use fat when the traditional blocks are not working for you in special circumstances. As Matt said extra calories should be filled by fat. When you calculate what that does, it means that you will get 50% or better of your daily requirements from FAT. What about the nutrients you need from Carbs and Protein. I have never seen a high fat diet promoted as healthy in any way shape or form. From what I can gather from Matt's posts, if you need more ATP to fulfill your calorie requirements, whether they are traditional or zone level, you have to fill that void with fat. I'm not thinking that is right. So, please enter this debate and set us all straight if you have the info to do so. |
|
sue
I don't know about the future, but I know who holds the future.... |
|
|
sue  Posts:263
 Zoner
 |
| 04/16/2009 7:15 AM |
|
| I'm sorry if it seems I took this thread away from ATP, that was not my intent, it just struck me about the Fat % needed to accomplish what ATP from fat is supposed to per Zone guidelines. |
|
sue
I don't know about the future, but I know who holds the future.... |
|
|
Sue K  Posts:8673
 Zone Expert

 |
| 04/16/2009 7:35 AM |
|
Hi Matt, My info was intended as a friendly tip, and I hadn't realized it might come across as cryptic. No offense meant. I appreciate your participation here. Thanks! :-) |
|
sue
Lost 100 lbs 14 yrs ago, off BP meds, thanks to the Zone diet and Zone fish oil!
To view my before/after pics and meal photos scroll over this picture and click when the link appears.
 |
|
|
sue  Posts:263
 Zoner
 |
| 04/16/2009 9:31 AM |
|
<div class='NTForums_Quote'>Posted By Sue on 04/16/2009 7:35 AM Hi Matt, My info was intended as a friendly tip, and I hadn't realized it might come across as cryptic. No offense meant. I appreciate your participation here. Thanks! :-)</div> Sue that still doesn't answer the question. |
|
sue
I don't know about the future, but I know who holds the future.... |
|
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/16/2009 12:00 PM |
|
BTW, I was thumbing through my copy of "Enter the Zone" this morning. In "Enter the Zone" in the chapter about "Exercise in the Zone" Dr. Sears says that fat produces about 2x the energy of carbohydrates -- and get this... he is talking about CALORIES NOT ATP. So, in one book he is saying 2x and in another book he is saying 3x. Could Dr. Sears simply be round the number down in one case and round it up in the other case? This seems to be what makes sense to me when read in context. Particularly given that Dr. Sears is talking about the amount of calories (not ATP) needed to supply energy requirements for various forms of exercise.
In fact, in "Enter the Zone," Dr. Sears explains that he calls fat high octane fuel because your body has so much more of it than it has glycogen, and because it is more calorie-dense than glycogen (he mentions that a lb. of fat is 3,500 calories and that the bodies' stores of glycogen are fairly limited and run out quickly). I think some people may have taken what Dr. Sears has written about fat, glycogen, and high/low octane fuel a bit out of context of what Dr. Sears actually was saying and what he meant by it (and to add to the confusion, approximations using rounded numbers are being used by Dr. Sears).
I think when you read Dr. Sears' in context, and realize that his books aren't intended for a scientific audience where precise numbers out to 2 decimals are needed, it is clear to me that Dr. Sears is not saying that a calorie's worth of glycogen produces any less ATP than a calorie's worth of fat. In this case, perhaps Dr. Sears should have used more precision and specifically explained what he meant so as to avoid confusion, but reading it again in context, I think it is clear that Dr. Sears is actually saying the same thing that I am saying above. The problem is that some of the people reading what he has written have misinterpreted what that means (and I can see how it would be easy to do so) and what implications should be drawn from his statements on the subject.
The more I look at this subject and what Dr. Sears actually has said on the subject (in context) the more convinced I am that he would completely agree with what I am saying here, at least as regards ATP generation from glucose versus adipose tissue.
I think the point about using "high octane fuel" has more to do with the fact that being in the Zone allows an endurance athlete to use fat as an energy source more efficiently even at reasonably high intensities and thus decreases the need for carb-loading and carb-refueling during endurance events like running a marathon. I think Dr. Sears point in this regard is well-taken, since an endurance athlete "bonks" when his or her muscle glycogen levels are completely depleted (that is what the "bonk" is, BTW). So, being able to more efficiently use the larger gas tank in your body (fat) for endurance athletes is definitely a very good thing as far as performance goes because it allows the muscle glycogen to be depleted at a slower rate during endurance training.
But what Dr. Sears is NOT saying is that the ratio of ATP produced by a gram of fat as compared with a gram of carbohydrate is greater than the ratio of the calories found in each.
Here are a few excerpts from "Enter the Zone" that I think prove my point:
"Fat, not carbohydrate, is the primary source of energy for your muscles. Not only is fat a more efficient raw-material source for energy -- fat actually supplies more than twice the energy of carbohydrates -- it is also far more plentiful."
--p. 55
"Completing a typical marathon will require about 2,000 calories of energy. That also happens to be the maximum amount of carbohydrate a marathoner can store in the muscles and liver: about 2,000 calories. If the marathon runner uses only his stored carbohydrates, he or she may not have enough energy to complete the race."
--p. 55
"Since there are 3,500 calories per pound of fat, this amount of accessible fat potentially provides the runner with 42,000 calories of energy -- more than twenty times the energy available from stored carbohydrates. If he or she can use his own stored fat, the runner actually has enough energy to run more than twenty marathons!"
--p. 56
"When you're in the Zone . . . the fat you require to meet your energy needs can be released faster."
--p. 57
"Making this energy source [ATP] requires a lot of raw materials. So the workers (enzymes) in the factories use the best available raw materials (fat or carbohydrate). They'd rather have fat, because it's a more efficient energy source and the body has a lot of it. (Carbohydrate is less efficient and you can't store much of it.) But if they can't get the fat they prefer, the enzymes switch to carbohydrate."
--p. 57
Please note that at no point is Dr. Sears ever claiming that the yield of ATP from fat as compared with carbohydrate is any greater than what you would expect from just talking about calories. All he is saying is that there is a maximum amount of carbohydrate that can be stored in the muscle and liver that can be used to produce energy which limits its usefulness as an energy source for endurance athletes because it is not as dense in calories or as plentiful as fat stores. |
|
|
|
|
sue  Posts:263
 Zoner
 |
| 04/16/2009 12:26 PM |
|
| Matt - so what all this means, if I've read it correctly is that the zone helps you use your stored fat, and it spares your carbs/glycogen. However, your stores of glycogen will still need replaced after a very strenuous work out and if you have a very low level of body fat, you will still need extra carb and protein calories to compensate. |
|
sue
I don't know about the future, but I know who holds the future.... |
|
|
Matthew  Posts:174
 Zoner

 |
| 04/16/2009 1:51 PM |
|
Sue (non picture Sue):
That is how I would interpret this. Calories are a measure of energy, after all. And calories from carbs or fat represent the amount of ATP contained in each (it gets more complicated with protein, which can be used for energy if needed, but which is not a preferred energy source). So, your calorie requirements are your calorie requirements, regardless of whether you are in the Zone or not, but what your body is using to meet those energy requirements, fat versus stored carbohydrates, does depend a great deal on being in the Zone (at least when you are not exercising anaerobically). There is a limit to how much carbohydrate your body can store, and certainly carbohydrate consumption affects various hormones (like insulin and GH to name a couple).
But if you are lean, have high activity levels, and/or have as your primary goal adding lean muscle tissue, assuming you are getting adequate levels of protein to actually build new muscle tissue, you absolutely need more calories to support your energy requirements. If you don't get enough calories from your diet, and you don't have enough calories from fat to use to make up for your caloric requirements, and your body fat levels are too low to use body fat to supply the deficiency, your body will start using the protein in your diet for energy (which it is very inefficient at) instead of building muscle. Your body will also try to protect itself by lowering your metabolism and decreasing your energy (basically conserving energy) and possibly breaking down muscle tissue to provide energy in extreme cases.
Energy requirements are energy requirements. And a calorie's worth of carbs produces the same amount of energy as a calorie's worth of fat. There are hormonal differences, but that is not what this post was meant to address. I still doubt that there are any Zone athletes out there who have low body fat levels who are capable of adding and significant amount of muscle if they are operating in a large caloric deficit. The body's energy requirements need to come from somewhere, either from stored body fat or diet, and if those are insufficient, and there is not enough surplus protein to be used to build new muscle, new muscle won't be built.
My point from the other thread remains. Both the quality of what you what you eat and the quantity of what you eat matter. Inject a bodybuilder with 4% body fat with tons of steroids, HGH, IGF-1, and Insulin (all at the proper times and in the proper dosages) and even if that bodybuilder is following the Zone diet, but eating a 1,000 calories less than his caloric requirements, and he isn't going to gain any muscle... even with his chemical cocktail (and this is the chemical cocktail that many professional bodybuilders actually use to get cartoonishly huge and lean). |
|
|
|
|
sue  Posts:263
 Zoner
 |
| 04/16/2009 2:13 PM |
|
Matt - I see we agree on this. I too believe you need enough calories regardless what the body is using to burn. I know Grant's thread is where we are dealing with this and I did post a question on there, about % of different nutrients based on Zone principles of Elite athletes 2 or 3x their fat. I'll leave it there since this is not the thread for that.
I hope to head to the library to pick up an earlier zone book so I can read these references in complete detail. I am interested to see if this is what Sue was referring to.
They've taken to calling me sue with the little "s" as I didn't cap my name in my sig and Sue does. However I think the moniker you like is a bit nicer for yourself. I didn't use it here as you are the only Matt at this time posting on this thread. LOL |
|
sue
I don't know about the future, but I know who holds the future.... |
|
|
Cranberrycat  Posts:5313
 Zone Expert

 |
| 04/16/2009 2:33 PM |
|
Wow, thanks "sexy" Matt (LOL) and "little" sue for expanding on that! To me honest, I will have to take this home and review it in more detail later. Can't seem to focus on it (especially with the pile of other things in front of me that I should be doing right now). |
|
Cranberrycat
We don't own the earth; we borrow it from our children.
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
ActiveForums 3.6
|
|
 |
|
Dr. Barry Sears is a leading authority on the dietary control of hormonal response. A former research scientist at the Boston University School of Medicine and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Dr. Sears has dedicated his research efforts over the past 30 years to the study of lipids. He holds 13 U.S. Patents in the areas of intravenous drug delivery systems and hormonal regulation for the treatment of cardiovascular disease.
A turning point in his research occurred in 1982. That year, the Nobel Prize in Medicine was awarded for discoveries of the role that specialized hormones, known as eicosanoids, play in the development of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, auto-immune diseases, and cancer. Since eicosanoids are only generated from dietary fat, Dr. Sears reasoned that one could apply intravenous drug delivery principles to nutrition in order to control these exceptionally powerful hormonal responses with laser-like precision. In essence, his approach treats food as if it were a drug.
This area of his research led to various patents in the area of hormonal control by essentially using food as an oral drug delivery system to modulate eicosanoids especially for cardiovascular, diabetic, and neurological patients.
The impact of Dr. Sears’ revolutionary work in the dietary control of hormonal response began with the publication of his landmark book, The Zone. Since its publication in June 1995, The Zone has sold more than 2,000,000 hardcover copies, and became a #1 best seller on the New York Times book list. In addition, The Zone has been translated into 22 languages indicating a worldwide response to Dr. Sears’ research. His second book, Mastering the Zone, published in 1997, also became a New York Times bestseller with hardcover sales in excess of 500,000 copies to date. His third book, Zone Perfect Meals in Minutes, published in 1997, quickly became one of the best-selling cookbooks of 1997 and an another New York Times bestseller. The Anti-Aging Zone was published in 1999 and provides the molecular insights into how the Zone Diet can reverse the aging process. The Omega Rx Zone, published in 2002, explores the molecular foundation of chronic disease and how high-dose fish oil can dramatically reverse it. His latest book The Anti-Inflammation Zone discusses how to combat silent inflammation in order to reduce the risk of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, dementia, and many other inflammatory conditions—and how to reverse these conditions if they are already present. To date more than 5 million hardcover copies of his Zone books have been sold in the United States.
His research has elevated food from more than simply a source of calories to being recognized as an exceptionally powerful drug. Because of his revolutionary research, Dr. Sears has been a frequent guest on many national programs such as 20/20, Today, Good Morning America, CBS Morning News, CNN, and MSNBC.
Dr. Sears continues his ongoing research as President of Zone Labs, a biotechnology company in Danvers, MA as well as the President of the non-profit Inflammation Research Foundation in Marblehead, MA. In addition to continuing research on the hormonal effects of food, Dr. Sears has expanded his research in developing innovative dietary approaches to treating cancer and neurological conditions, as well as his on-going work in treating cardiovascular diease and type 2 diabetes.
|
|
I have been taking the Fish Oil for over 3 years now. I am 44 playing hockey and working out. The Fish oil helps with the pain that I get from playing hockey. It greatly enhances my performance on the ice and while working out. I have noticed a big difference in my energy, attentiveness and memory. If I miss a day for whatever reason, I notice a huge difference and it feels like something is missing. Anyway that is my short little story and it comes from the heart.
– Carter B.
I am a nutritionist and Ph.D. doctor of health and nutrition. For Dr. Sears to figure out balancing fat, carbs and protein, is really beyond brilliant. It is a milestone in diet history. I go over people's diet/emotional journals. Mostly all the time, we discover that the fatigue, irritability, unstable emotions were due to the imbalance in their diet. Using the Zone to balance them out, helps control weight, roller coaster emotions and gives them energy. Dr. Sears is so right when he says food is medicine. He has figured out the most powerful drug combination going, called The Zone.
Best and healthy wishes,
– Elaine W., Ph.D., N.C., M.A.
I have a very exhausting job as a flight attendant. I read the "Omega Rx Zone" about 4 years ago and started taking the fish oil. I am 47 and have been flying for 22 years. I am very active, I run and lift weights. But combining lack of regular sleep, a physically demanding job, and irregular eating patterns this job takes a toll on the body. Since taking the fish oil, I have noticed that I do not get exhausted. I get tired, but not exhausted. I stopped taking it for a couple of months and then started taking another company's fish oil. I started getting exhausted again. I came back to Zone Labs and will continue with the fish oil for the rest of my life. I believe in the product and it makes a huge difference in my life. It makes a difference with my running as well. I also bring the bars and shakes with me on the road. It is almost impossible to eat the way I should at work. I haven't found the right secret. At least I have my Zone fish oil, bars, and shakes.
– Kathryn S.
I have been in the Zone, for about 1 month now. I wanted to share with you how wonderful I think this program is. I have been a personal trainer for almost 10 years and actively compete in numerous athletic activities. The Zone program has helped me to achieve a better awareness of my nutritional needs and the results I have seen are amazing! I have lost nearly 13 lbs since I have been in the Zone. I feel more mentally alert, more focused at work, have greater intensity during my training, have made significant strength gains, and just feel better over all. With that said, I would like to thank you for helping me in my quest for "super-health"!
Thank you!
– Rob Y.
I read 'The Zone' and as exactly as I could followed the advice for diet. I noted weight loss progress. Over six months, I lost 33 pounds. One year has passed since then. I have maintained the new weight, guided always by Zone concepts. The Zone is powerful - I have found it fantastic and I am very grateful to Dr Sears.
– Lyn S.
Before I stumbled across the Zone I was weighing close to two hundred pounds and I was depressed. I used to be a gymnast as a young man. I would think, "look at me now," when I looked in a mirror. The day I found 'The Zone' book, I was intrigued and as I read it the science made sense and so, I began to follow the "treatment". I began to lose weight and I was feeling way more energetic. I am forty two years old, I am very active and my weight is down to 162 lbs, 38 pounds lost on the Zone. I cycle, walk, jog, swim and I can now perform some of the more simple gymnastic skills I did twenty years ago...I literally feel like I have turned back the clock.
Thank you!
– Jack J.
I have been on the Zone diet for 7 years. I did not go on the diet to lose weight necessarily; but fairly quickly I lost 25 pounds, going from 190 to 165; from a 36-inch waist to a 32-inch waist. I primarily did the Zone to live healthier. My health is excellent now. I just turned 62 years old. My Zone is my eating lifestyle now; I seldom stray; and I do not miss anything. It is The Good Life.
– Curtis Y.
My wife's doctor told her to read "Enter the Zone" and to do the diet, so I told her I would do it with her. After only one week on the plan we went on a strenuous hike (the first of the year), and when we stopped at our favorite coffee shop on the way home I was able to get out of the car and stand upright and walk into the place without pain or stiffness. The Zone had eliminated all the inflammation that had always forced me to stumble all humped over into the coffee shop any time we skied or hiked all day.
Thank you, Doctor Sears.
– Larry C.
I used to have a lot of knee pain when I walked or ran. I have been taking Omega Rx for almost a year now, and rarely have any pain. I believe it is the anti-inflammation action of the oil. I feel smarter as well. Thanks for developing such a superior oil!
– Joe W.
Prior to following the Zone Diet, my body fat was around 15% and my weight around 153 pounds. No matter what I did, my weight and body fat did not change much. I regularly cycled 20-30 hours per week logging well over 400 miles. That had little impact on body fat or weight. Diet also seemed to have little impact on body fat or weight. Within a couple of months of following the zone diet, my weight dropped rather quickly to 142 pounds and body fat to about 8%. I still regularly cycle up to 20 hours per week (during the summer). I have also started strength training. I eat about 16 blocks per day. I take 3.6 grams of fish oil per day, along with Vitamin E, Alpha Lipoic Acid, CoQ10, and B & C vitamins. I also take GLA, which in my opinion, has significantly reduced fatigue and improved recovery times after exercise.
– Jeremy S.
|
|
All polyphenols have antioxidant properties than can be measured by their Oxygen Radical Absorption Capacity (ORAC), but not all polyphenols have anti-inflammatory properties. The polyphenols in Dr. Sears’ Zone Polyphenol Plus have been carefully chosen to have both.
Polyphenols are the phytochemicals that not only give fruits and vegetables their color, but also help regulate inflammation. In addition, polyphenols also activate the key enzyme (AMP kinase) that helps restore cellular ATP levels. Polyphenols also help regulate the activation of inducible inflammatory proteins (such as COX-2 and inflammatory cytokines).
There are more than 4,000 known polyphenols, and the richest sources are fruits and vegetables. In general, the more color a fruit or vegetable has, the richer the polyphenol content.
|
|
Zone Labs’ Ultra Refined Omega-3 Concentrates are three times fresher and contain less than 1/10th the mercury than what is allowed by the Norwegian Medicinal Standard and European Pharmacopoeia Standard
Zone Labs adheres to the International Fish Oil Standard (IFOS), an independent third party validated laboratory quality standard that is more rigid than any other global standard for purity.
- No company in the worlds runs more tests with IFOS than Zone Labs
- Zone Labs receives a 5 out of 5 star IFOS rating for every batch it tests
|
| Standard |
IFOS Standard for a 5-Star Ranking |
Council for Responsible Nutrition |
European Pharmacopeia |
Norwegian Medicinal Standards |
| Peroxide |
< 3.75 meg/kg |
5 meg/kg |
10 meg/kg |
10 meg/kg |
| Totox Levels |
< 20 meg/kg |
26 meg/kg |
NA |
NA |
| Lead |
< 10 ppb |
10 ppb |
100 ppb |
100 ppb |
| Mercury |
< 10 ppb |
10 ppb |
100 ppb |
100 ppb |
| Dioxans and Furans |
< 1 ppt |
2 ppt |
2 ppt |
2 ppt |
| PCBs |
< 45 ppb |
90 ppb |
NA |
NA |
|
|
"IFOS – THE TOP GLOBAL PURITY STANDARD FOR OMEGA-3 FROM FISH"
|
|
 |
 |
|
Zone Labs products show no detectable lead or mercury when tested down to 10ppb, which is 10 times below the Norwegian Medicinal Standard and European Pharmacopoeia Standard limits.
|
Zone Labs products are three times fresher than the minimum allowed by the Norwegian Medicinal Standard and European Pharmacopoeia Standards (based on average peroxide values).
|
Zone Labs starts with only wild, small fish from pristine Chilean waters and ends with proprietary validation and testing processes to achieve an IFOS certified 5 star rating.
8-Step Manufacturing Process - Quality Assured
Testing to specification all raw materials, bulk products, packaging material and finished products – always using stringent internal standards and in-process testing.
- Extraction of fish oil
- Winterization – remove limited amounts of saturated fats
- Absorption – remove heavy metals
- Preliminary Molecular Distillation – refining “touch up” to reduce contaminants
- Oil conversion to ethyl esters
- Ethyl ester thermal fractionation – remove additional saturated fats
- True Molecular Distillation – final refining to remove pcb’s and long-chain monoenes
- Rigid Processes – proprietary validation, inspection and encapsulation methods. Independent lab verification of IFOS requirements and certified 5 star rating
No farmed fish. No large fish. Pristine waters.
Zone Labs starts with wild sardines & anchovies fished from cold, pristine waters off of South America where there are less environmental impurities.
A recommended serving of Zone Labs Ultra-Refined Concentrates delivers 8 times more omega-3’s than a typical retail fish oil supplement.
Most fish oil supplements have 30% or less of the healthy omega-3s EPA and DHA, with the remaining 70% of the capsule containing unbeneficial, lesser refined fatty acids that contribute to their bad taste and gastric side effects.
Getting a clinically valid dose of omega-3’s is easy with Zone Labs’ Ultra-Refined Omega-3 Concentrates.
Typical Retail Dose = 300mg omega-3
Standard Zone Dose = 2400mg omega-3
A serving of canned tuna has 12 times less omega-3’s than
Zone Labs Ultra-Refined Omega-3 Concentrates
|
Commonly consumed fish and shellfish in the United States
Mercury Source: Food and Drug Administration, FDA 1900-2004, “National Marine Fisheries Service Survey of Trace Elements in the Fishery Resource". Omega-3 Level Source: American Heart Association Website.
|
| |
Mercury level
in parts per million (ppm) |
Omega-3 fatty acids
(milligrams per 3-oz. serving) |
| Zone Omega-3 Products |
< 0.01 |
2400 (standard 4 capsule serving |
| Salmon (fresh, frozen) |
0.014 |
1200 |
| Flounder or sole |
0.050 |
480 |
| Pollock |
0.041 |
450 |
| Crab |
0.060 |
400 |
| Scallops |
0.050 |
290 |
| Shrimp |
ND* |
290 |
| Catfish |
0.050 |
270 |
| Clams |
ND* |
250 |
| Cod |
0.095 |
210 |
| Canned Tuna (light) |
0.120 |
200 |
|
Zone Labs’ leading product. OmegaRx delivers all of the benefits of Zone Labs’ ultra-refined omega-3 concentrates.
Advantages
- Delivers clinically proven health benefits from the omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA*
- Promotes a healthy heart, healthy brain, healthy immune system, healthy circulatory system, healthy joints, healthy moods, healthy triglyceride levels and a healthy pregnancy*
- Combats silent inflammation
|
Start getting Zone recipes, tips, articles and exclusive promotions sent right to your inbox!
After you provide your email address we’ll send you a confirmation email. You can “opt-out” of this program at anytime by following the simple instructions provided at the end of every email we send you. We will never send too many emails (spam) and we’ll never sell of rent your email to another company.
If you are already registerd with ZoneDiet.com and are receiving emails from Dr. Sears Zone then you do not need to provide your email address to us at this time.
To assure your Zone emails reach your inbox, be sure to add our email address,
reply@zoneliving.com, to your address book.
|
 |