Dr. Andy Galpin: Why You’re Not Losing Fat & How Metabolism Really Works

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
And one thing that's a massive topic of debate when we get to
nutrition, food and fat loss is seed oils.
Oh my God. It's probably one of the most
trending, polarizing topics in the health space right now.
Alright. Love the deep breath that you
just took. Good grief, are people wasting
time, CEO? Andy, welcome back.
The research of potential negative effects of seed oil are

(00:21):
so weak to ban an oil like that and to then come out and say
things like, Oh yeah, beef tallow is perfectly healthy.
So as long as you fry your burgers and beef tallow.
I mean, you have to have a special level of nuts.
I think the big thing about public messaging that I feel in
the health space is now it's become very marketable.
That's the problem. So it becomes very fear
mongering. Marketing it's going to be

(00:43):
confusing. They're being really careful to
just intentionally mislead you, but then legally being within
their rights of saying their study didn't show that.
I used to send it to every student in my class and he
outlined I think it's like 6 steps that every fad diet takes
so you'd be stunned. It's the same exact research.
Can you boost metabolism? You can.
When we say that if you had a coffee right now, you would

(01:03):
boost your metabolism, would youlose more weight?
No, they can legally say yes because they can show a human
had this their metabolic rate went up.
The overwhelming majority of products that will boost your
metabolism acutely will not likely lead to any foul loss.
With things like weight loss, the key is to actually stack as
many positive wins in your favorthat don't make your life that

(01:24):
cause more suffering. If you had a stack was more
effective nutrition versus exercise.
It's not even close though. If you are a regular listener to
the show or live Bobby well or this is your first episode
you're listening to, I really want to ask just a very small
quick favour if you could pleasehit the subscribe button or
leave a review. This helps the show more than

(01:45):
you can imagine. It means the world to help
growing this show and you all know that.
I have a huge thing to want to hit 100,000 on YouTube this
year, and I can't do that without your support.
I really aim to bring you the best guests possible out there
and I pride myself in doing thatfor the show because it's so
important. But to keep the guests coming,

(02:05):
to get them to be bigger and to bring more helpful information
to your ears and your eyes. I really would love to ask you
to subscribe to the show. Thank you.
So we had an episode and I mean,we barely got through half of
what I want to talk to you about.
So today we're back Round 2 and I want to talk to you about
everything. Metabolism, fat loss.
Amazing. OK, I know this is your real

(02:27):
area of domain. So the first question that I
just thought would be really helpful for listeners to
understand, which is what is thenumber one metabolism myth?
People still believe that you want to bust.
Well, the probably, it's hard topass by the idea that there is
such thing as a fast and slow metabolism.

(02:47):
Now there's, I'm a little tonguein cheek with that because it's,
it's kind of semantic in the sense that your metabolism isn't
faster or slower than anybody else's, but your metabolic rate
can be. And so this is where someone
says I have a fast metabolism orslow metabolism.
What they're trying to convey isI put on weight easily or it

(03:07):
goes off really quickly. It's hard for me to eat enough
to keep my body weight up or anyvariations of those.
It's not because your metabolic rate is any faster or slower.
And so it's just really conceptually, I understand what
you're trying to say and we actually generally know what I
mean. But this can cause problems
because then people don't reallyunderstand the process and then

(03:28):
therefore make poor decisions orare influenced when they see,
read, hear things describing something that can clinically
speed up your metabolism, but that won't necessarily result in
you losing more weight any faster.
So there's a very big differencebetween something like what's
called fat oxidation and fat loss.

(03:50):
OK. And so here's how the marketing
claims can be confusing. If I were to develop a product
of any kind, it could be a lighttechnology, a supplement,
exercise routine. Fill in the blank.
And I did a study in humans or in mice or in cell culture, and
I showed that that thing increased the rate of fat

(04:13):
oxidation, which is the speed and frequency which you're
burning fat. That doesn't necessarily tell
you anything about will that result in you losing more
weight? So, but I could, if I ran that
study clinically say studies have proven our product burns
fat. So it's a real like now they

(04:36):
can't say our studies have proven you will lose fat on your
body, but they don't say that. They say fat oxidation up 300
percent or fat burning shown clinically 3 randomized like.
And so they're being really careful to just intentionally
mislead you, but then legally being within their rights of
saying their study didn't show that.

(04:58):
And so understanding what metabolism is means fat burning
metabolic rate. Like, that's why I actually
think it's an important distinction to pull out and it's
not completely pedantic because it can lead to people being
misled and frustrated and issuesand things like that.
So I think that that would be mytop myth.

(05:18):
Well, I think like, it's such a big topic.
Like if you think about how manydiet books have been written
over the past, like, 50 years. Oh, yeah, right.
Everyone wants to try and lose weight.
A few people want to try and gain weight, but the majority of
people are trying to lose weight.
And people will spend so much money on products or regimes or,
you know, there was a very like old term, like, yo-yo dieting,

(05:40):
which isn't around as much anymore.
But you know, people will go up and down.
One of the most highly cited papers, papers I ever wrote, was
on the science of yo-yo dieting.Oh, wow.
So it is still around. It's still very, very popular.
The term has fallen out a littlebit, yeah, but conceptually it's
still a huge problem. So like if people are stuck in
that camp and they go and you just said, you know, there's not
such a thing as fast versus slowmetabolism.

(06:02):
But if someone's stuck in what they believe is the slow camp,
let's just say even that you've just completely buttered that
myth. Let's talk about like the
metabolic rate and how we can kind of distinguish that.
How can people lose weight? What's like your number one
thing? OK, if you want more information
and the full thoughts on this, Idid.
I think the first episode of season 2 of my podcast was The

(06:26):
Science of Boosting metabolism. Can you boost metabolism?
So again, we yes, you can and but it's important to
understanding exactly what we'resaying when we say that if you
had a coffee right now, you would boost your metabolism.
It would shoot way up. Just had one.
Great. Would you lose more weight?

(06:48):
No. So can you boost metabolism?
Well, it depends on how we're defining boost.
And so the easiest way to pull this apart are what I call acute
and chronic. Acute means I do something right
now and my basal metabolic rate goes up instantly.
There are 1000 things that can do that.

(07:08):
There's fun stuff like the food,ginger, cayenne, chilies,
Peppers. These have been shown in quality
research studies to boost metabolism just like coffee
would instantaneously and and a myriad of other things you could
do. Like green tea?
That's also quite totally. So if you've ever heard things
like that, that's exactly what Iwas explaining at the beginning.

(07:30):
There are studies on that. They can legally say yes because
they can show a human had this, their metabolic rate went up,
but the question is how quickly did it come back down, How long
did that thing persist and how much of a magnitude of effect
did it have? And did it actually net result

(07:51):
in weight loss chronically? 6 weeks later, 8 weeks later,
six months? Whatever your time demand is,
the overwhelming majority of products that will boost your
metabolism acutely will not likely lead to any fat loss.
And This is why the scientific community in general will say
things like, oh, fat burners area scam, these weight loss hacks

(08:15):
and these cleanses and other things.
And that's what they're referring to.
But then the consumers confused because they're like, but then I
thought they had studies on thisand I read their study and they
had one in their product page and I had links there.
There was that. Here's the confusion again.
It's a little bit of a bait and switch.
So can they boost your metabolism?
Yes, Generally when the average human is saying boost my

(08:37):
metabolism, they're almost always referring to can you
raise my metabolic rate in the long term, such as to say, can I
have, can it be easier for me tomaintain my weight or easier for
me to lose my weight? Can you help me burn more
calories at rest and not have toexercise so much or have more

(08:58):
weight loss with the same exercise?
That's what they're referring to, that that's what most people
are trying to get out of it because they want the weight
loss. You just have metabolic rate for
people that don't know what thatis, what is that?
So when we when we think about your overall metabolic balance,
and I'll actually maybe start atwhy your speed is not any
different. So metabolic rate or, or speed,

(09:20):
your metabolism speed refers to the speed at which you can break
down nutrients, not digestion. We're talking literally
biochemistry and chemical reactions.
So no one really has a differentspeed for the most part at that.
What we're talking about is what's the net balance.
So there's a different handful of different things that go into
this overall what's called energy expenditure, EE, total

(09:42):
energy expenditure, how many calories you burning throughout
the day, week, month, OK, that energy expenditure equation is a
composite of several things. One is referred to as your BMR
or RMR, basal metabolic rate, orresting metabolic rate.
These are different, but for thesake of this conversation, we
just count them basically the same.

(10:03):
We're roughly talking about whatis the total amount of energy
and getting calories that your body uses to stay alive.
This is not accounting for exercise.
This is not accounting for movement.
It's not accounting for breakingdown food or metabolic
processes. This is just to keep you alive,
so keep this in mind. I'm going to come back to this.
This is critical to that acute versus chronic question and what

(10:26):
products work and what things don't.
That is the part that can be moved, that can be altered with
numerous protocols. The second thing in this energy
expenditure equation is what's called the thermal effect of
food, TEF. This is as simple as the name,
the amount of energy your body burns breaking down food once

(10:48):
you've eaten it. So the thermal effect energy
heat given off during the digestive process is a way to
think about that. And we know that that differs
for different macro nutrients. We know that that differs for
Whole Foods versus liquid foods or ground foods, chopped foods
versus large chunks. And these things can alter that.

(11:09):
But the reality of it is you're generally talking like probably
somewhere in the neighborhood of10 to 15% of your calories are
explained by thermal effect. So it's not nothing
theoretically if you went from eating an all liquid diet with a
very low thermal effect because your body doesn't have to work
to. Like a juice cleanse.
Juice cleanses and you went to an all whole food uncooked diet.

(11:31):
You might see some percent change in your thermal effect
because your body's working hardto break those whole pieces of
food up. But the net caloric gain there
is not much, maybe 20 calories, 50 calories, let's say it's
crazy. It's 100 calories.
That's not going to do much for your fat loss equation.

(11:52):
So thermal effects can change, but it's not the variable that
we're looking for. When somebody's saying I want a
faster like metabolism, it's something to think about.
And with things like weight loss, the key is to actually
stack as many positive wins in your favor that don't make your
life, that cause more suffering.So you do want to like stack a

(12:13):
bunch of little wins there. So thermal effect is a
reasonable one. This May lead to somebody
saying, oh I'm going to go on a little bit of a higher protein
diet because protein is the highest thermal effect.
I'm going to eat more Whole Foods for this stuff.
I'll have less processed liquid pre made ones so I can chew
more. Fiber, all that stuff.
Totally. It's more satiating,
potentially. It's more filling.

(12:35):
When my calories are down, I won't be as hungry and not
suffering. And if you've ever died of a
lot, that stuff starts to matter.
Oh, yeah, the hunger pains. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
So when we look at successful dieting, one of the things that
came out of that paper that our yo-yo dieting paper that Jackson
Pales LED is sustainability is the number one predictor of diet

(12:57):
success. How much weight you're going to
lose, as well as how long you'llkeep it off, how well you can
sustain that and adhere to that protocol is the number one
predictor. So if those little tricks make
you again, feel like a little bit less suffering, you're not
living in such scarcity. You're you're feeling like it's
a little more abundant, you're more likely to stay to it, more
likely to have success. So again, those things do

(13:19):
matter. But to come back to energy
expenditure, we've covered the two pieces so far, thermal
effect being the second one, first one being that basal
metabolic rate. Then you've got exercise, right?
That's clearly a variable that you can move.
Most people don't burn even close to the amount of calories
in their workouts that they think they do.
Everyone thinks every workout is1000 calories.

(13:40):
It's probably closer to 2 or 300.
Have you ever heard that term? You can't run a bad diet.
Yes, it's not true, but it's nothorrible like advice because you
definitely can. Yeah, look at a distance runner.
They eat a whole bunch of stuff and they don't always pay
attention to their food. But you're going to run 100
kilometers a week, You're going to burn some serious.

(14:01):
Calories, yeah, but if you thinkabout the average person.
If if the, if you're framing that saying in the way of saying
the vast majority of the benefityou'll get or the the easiest,
most effective thing you can do for weight loss for the average
person, if you had a stack, what's more effective nutrition
versus exercise? It's not even close.
It'll be the nutrition. Like not even close.

(14:23):
I actually had Herman Ponzer on my show as well.
Herman runs his lab at Duke, andhe's the one that really pushed
forward this idea of the adaptive thermogenesis model,
which is really important because what this does is
explain why calories still matter a ton.
And people love to like cite examples mostly like total.

(14:44):
Of. But it's not a debate like it's,
it's a fundamental miscommunication and people like
really just not understanding basic math and and chemistry.
But Herman has shown very clearly now multiple times, when
you increase energy expenditure via exercise, there's a very
strong likelihood that your bodywill down regulate endogenous

(15:07):
energy expenditure. This is why some people go.
I kept my diet the same. I started working out.
I tracked it on a heart rate. I burned 500 extra calories per
day. I did it for a month.
I did not lose a pound, which does happen.
That's a real thing. Yeah, it.
Does. And then people use that as an
example of other 4 calories don't matter.
What you don't realize is your body down regulated basal

(15:31):
metabolic rate and or the other thing I haven't discussed yet,
the 4th component of E in the exact number that you burned
with exercise to match that. So calories and calories out
still is exactly happening, but you just didn't have a sense of
this 4th variable that got moveddown.
And the research is very clear. This thing moves down and is

(15:53):
highly related to energy expenditure.
So the benefits of exercise are impossible to even count.
There's so much. The literature on successful fat
loss in combination with exercise is extraordinarily
strong. It is a great idea, but it is
fair. Based on Herman's work and many
others, it is fair to say the nutrition component is more

(16:16):
important for strictly fat loss.And #2 if your only strategy for
fat loss is more caloric expenditure from exercise might
work a little bit, might work for a little while, but some
people might run into problems with that.
And again, his, his, his work showing that it because that

(16:38):
adaptive model is like, OK, Thisis why you're running into that
problem. Now, there's other conversations
we could have with why you wouldstill really want to exercise
for fat loss specifically because of the data on how much
more effective you'll keep it off for years.
People who exercise are far morelikely to keep the fat off years
later than those who simply reduce calorie intake,

(17:00):
preservation of muscle, if we'relooking at body composition
versus total just fat loss or total weight loss and many other
reasons. So if you and we can come back
to this if you'd like, but if you want to look at the totality
of everything involved in the equation here, you still really
do want to exercise. But at the same time, yes, the

(17:20):
nutrition is going to be doing most of your damage.
So the 4th component here and then maybe I'll take a breath. 4
audience members are like Oh my gosh my.
Ears. They're taking notes.
I'm mentally taking notes. The 4th component which I'm
alluding to is what's called your NEAT.
So this is your non exercise caloric expenditure.

(17:45):
So this is not what your body has to do to run your immune
system and keep your brain healthy.
It's not what you're using to break down and digest food.
It's not exercise, it is everything else.
This is what you're doing right now, twitching with your
fingers, it is bobbing your footup and down, it is shaking your
leg, it's pacing, it's washing dishes, it's all this other

(18:06):
little stuff. Few people have a sense of that,
but what's happening at all times is your body is actually
auto regulating caloric balance with that, such as to say if you
have caloric surplus, you're more likely to be twitching your
foot all day. You'll probably get up and pace
more because your body knows we're in a high energy state,

(18:29):
we're going to move more. And anyone who's done any
reasonable amount of dieting will tell you the opposite
happens when you are in caloric deficit.
My friend Mike Safai, former Miss, like Mr. Universe, I
think, and Jiu jitsu black belt,he would always, he called it
like the shoulder slump. When you get enough into

(18:50):
dieting, like you just start finding your shoulder on couches
and you start leaning up againstwalls, like you find ways to
just save calories, you're way less likely to get up and go
check on something. I'll do it later.
You're not like you'll look at your foot and your leg.
You're not bouncing up and down.You're not doing like you're
just preserving calories at all costs.

(19:12):
And you will almost never recognize this.
That's what your body is doing. It's saying we're in a very low
energy state in this case for weeks to months.
And so now it is really pulling that NEAT down to the lowest
number possible, which makes dieting hard because you're
dieting in calories, you're trying to keep your exercise up.

(19:33):
Your body is pulling down its energy expenditure for your
NEAT. You're training harder because
you're not losing weight, it's pulling it down even more.
You're training even harder because you're not losing
weight, it's pulling it down even more.
And then you're just like, boom.I give up.
Totally. Which I feel like where so many
people basically end up out. Well, there's a physiological

(19:53):
reason for that. Everything in their Physiology.
This is not a willpower. This is an entire history of a
species evolution saying do the opposite.
You're going the wrong way, right?
Every signal in your body is telling you refeed, refeed,
refeed. And so one strategy to mitigate
this is to actually refeed, but to do it intelligently.

(20:18):
Now, Jackson actually has run. He ran a study right after we
published, he published this review paper.
We looked at different percentage refeeds and then the
refeed data isn't ultra impressive, but it is a viable
option. And so this is, you can do this
a bunch of ways, but to give onetangible example here, let's say
you were at a 10% caloric deficit.

(20:41):
So if you need 2000 calories to stay at the same weight, same
energy levels, same exercise, all that stuff, you'd want to
drop your calories by about 10%,which means we're not going from
2000 calories to 1000. That's what people will do,
right? It's just like, OK, that's it.
I normally eat four eggs and twopieces of toast.

(21:02):
I'm going to go to 1 egg and a bite of an apple.
And you're like, whoa, OK, yeah.What do you think is going to
happen here? Some people can get away with
that, especially if you are really like have quite a bit of
body fat, you can survive. But if, if you're like moderate
to low, that's going to be a challenge.
You might be OK for a while, butthen like people say you're
going to, your body will go intostarvation mode.

(21:24):
That's not what's happening. But what's happening is, is, is
what I just described. So conceptually, you're not
totally wrong there with it saying we don't have enough
calories. It's been a long time.
We're getting very lean now all pull this stuff down.
You'll see this in people's lab work.
We have, we have so much. I have a company called Vitality

(21:45):
Blueprint and we do high performance blood work.
It's not medicine, it's not a TRT clinic.
I'm not doing heart disease. It's strictly for people trying
to maximize performance. And one thing we have in there
are markers, one of them is called low energy expenditure.
So we can actually see in your blood work if you are in this
chronic low energy state. And so we can tell people, look,

(22:08):
these numbers are getting to a level here.
Testosterone is starting to dip in men and women.
Testosterone getting low in women is really problematic.
Yeah, hormonal functions really start changing when you're in
this state. Like you're going to like every
hormone you can imagine is goingto tank when you're in low
energy state. As someone who has spent a long
time studying the mind body connection, I'm constantly asked

(22:30):
what do I use to track my healthsince April.
You've probably seen if you're watching the show, me wearing a
piece of tech on my arm and thatis no watch because I genuinely
believe it is being one of the most thoughtful and mind aware
pieces of tech that you can wear.
Unlike most wearables that focusjust on your steps or your
sleep, No watch is a bit different.
It gives you real time insights into your nervous system, the

(22:53):
invisible engine that calibratesit's everything from your stress
to your sleep, to your recovery,your rest, and ultimately your
health. With its stress recovery metric,
it doesn't just show you how long you were stressed for, but
also how long you were covered. It shows you your homeostatus.
And that to me is where real health begins.
And I think it's all something that we're craving.

(23:13):
And most importantly, it does this without dragging you back
to your phone, because that motion just depletes you.
It delivers meaningful health insights to you only when
something genuinely matters, using AI to turn complex signals
into clarity that you can understand.
And in just five days, it calibrates to your body and
creates your personalized healthfingerprint.

(23:34):
You can try it for 30 days completely free.
And if you're curious, now's thetime because they're giving you
guys 15% off with my code LW BW15.
If you head to knowwatch.com andyou guys know as listeners of
Live Well, Be Well and this whole community, that
understanding yourself in the most mindful way is one of the

(23:55):
most powerful things that you can do for your health.
And this little gadget helps youon your journey.
And then now you're just constantly bombarded with so
much information. Like the thing I see is
information overload for sure. Like when I was trying to start
this conversation today, obviously like so much about.
I took us way off. We're like however many minutes

(24:15):
in. By the way, it's like question
one, sorry. So many people like want to, you
know, I try and think about whatpeople come to me in clinic, but
so many times on what I look about, you know, the most
replayed is all around like metabolic health with you.
And people really want to understand that so much more.
But the thing that I see when itcomes to metabolic health is
that people are just just overwhelmed.

(24:35):
They're just overwhelmed. And ultimately they want to get
to a good way. And we are living in this like
conundrum of an obesity epidemicversus a mental health epidemic.
I don't think that it's a coincidence that there's two
epidemics kind of rising at the same time.
They're interlinked. It's like metabolic health is at

(24:55):
the base of it. I see a little bit differently,
but it's not completely wrong inthe sense that it is incredibly
related to Dang near every chronic disease.
Yeah. So yes, I, I, I don't actually
think it's fair to say it's at the base of it or the single
most important thing, but it's, it's a very relevant, incredibly

(25:17):
critical variable. And I'll say it differently.
Maybe one thing I would accept is if you said what would be the
single biggest chronic disease or single biggest thing we could
do that would have the net biggest impact on the human
race, every single person would say obesity.
Jeez, we actually do have a medication that is peeling kilos

(25:39):
and kilos off of general population people.
Boy, how do we think about this now?
And it's a really challenging thing.
And it's hard for me to make theargument that those drugs are
not bad. Really.
It's hard because if you look atit and go, OK, there's holes,
there's potential side effects for sure there are people that

(26:02):
are using it inappropriately, 100%.
There's a lack of long term data.
All these things are true and should not be forgotten.
So I do not see weight loss, Ozempics and so on and so forth
to be clear what we're talking about.
The GLP ones. GLP one medicines?
Yeah. Are they perfect?
No. Are they panaceas?
No. Are they the most interesting

(26:24):
thing that's happened in the weight loss space in our
lifetimes? Yes.
Yes, they are. Are they probably going to save
millions of lives? Yeah, they they probably will.
And it's the first time we can really say that no diet, no
strategy, no regime, as you called it, no supplement has
come close to even making a dentin the obesity problem across

(26:47):
the globe. And tell these things.
And when you when you have success like that, you go, OK,
for the average plumber who has 70 kilos to lose and is 38 years
old, OK, will he lose some muscle mass?
Maybe we'll some of the other side of.
But you tell me what's going to happen that that guy's not going

(27:09):
to live to 60. He's going to die.
If this is the first step in that journey, if this finds him
success, if this shows positive benefit, I think on like you're
going to save a lot of lives. And then there's going to be a
bunch of problems on the back end.
And I'm sure we'll find more side effects that we don't even
realize right now. And maybe we'll, but it's real.

(27:31):
There is something there for thefirst time in my life where I'm
like, OK, the shortcut might be like, might be OK here, Like
there might be something here. This one.
But you know what I worry about that plumber who's 38 that needs
to lose that much, that much weight.
It's two things. I agree with you.
I think it's one of the most like revolutionary things we
have towards weight loss. But there's two things I worry

(27:53):
about is that there's not enoughsupport there in the retraining
of how they're going to keep that weight off.
Changing lifestyle and habits for education at all?
Right. So it's not being delivered in
that context. So we put somebody on it for
eight months and like what we'reseeing now from data is that
they just rebound back to the same weight if.
They come off the drug. Yep.
And so that's that's the kind ofissue if people are already

(28:14):
struggling before they get onto the drug with any types of these
lifestyle interventions, that's the problem.
I think they'd go, Oh my gosh, this is amazing.
And then they go through this whole cycle again, like a bit of
yo-yo dieting, but more extreme,and they put the weight back on
to the cost like it's so expensive right now.
And so right. And so if you're thinking about

(28:35):
a plumber who maybe doesn't havehuge disposable income, like how
are they going to maintain that?So I think that's the like kind
of caveat. And I know especially with like
the long term trial research, wedon't have yet, but there's no
discussion on that because we don't know what that's going to
be. But they're like the two things
that I kind of see as the crux of the issue.
Yeah, fully agree. And there's probably, if we sat
here, we could probably come up with five other really important

(28:58):
questions and strong concerns and they would be valid.
And we should not forget about those anytime soon.
And we should continue to ask questions and continue to ask
for transparency and accountability and all those
things. And we will for sure find more
things that are a problem. I think the first point you
brought up is another one like the biggest 1.
So we're not actually helping this person learn anything.

(29:21):
I think just the awareness and having the conversations around
it, I think that even will just help distill more education to
people that are even looking at going on these.
And one thing that's a massive topic of debate when we get to
nutrition, food and fat loss is seed oils.
Oh my God. OK.
I can't not have this conversation.
Go ahead. What's your thought and take on
seed oils? Because honestly it's probably

(29:42):
one of the most trending polarizing topics in the health
space right now. All.
Right. I love the deep breath that you
just took. I'll try to avoid banging my
head off the microphone here. You can probably tell by the
context of which I'm approachingthis question my overarching
feeling on this one. Much to say.

(30:05):
Like anything, nuance and context is the most appropriate
and fair answer here to say thatthough.
Good grief, are people wasting time with seed oil?
The research of potential negative effects of seed oil are
so weak. That doesn't mean there's

(30:28):
nothing there. If you go OK and you give 6
caveats to that, you can find some examples of seed oils being
concerning. OK, so if it was left outside
for seven days in the sun and it's gone rancid and someone's
in a hypercaloric state and theyoverconsume these things in the
presence of alcohol, OK. Yeah.
Like, all right, the other only semblance of an argument here

(30:53):
that makes sense there, there's two they're they're bad.
They're mental gymnastics. And for the record, I have many,
many people who I deeply respectand friends who are as far into
like the seed oils or the devil camps as possible.
I would name them my names, but it it doesn't matter.

(31:13):
That's one argument that they can make.
The other second argument is it's not that the seed oils are
that bad, but they are so commonly consumed in the
presence of other really bad behaviors and actions that they
are. It's the old gateway, gateway
drug sort of thing. Again, in my opinion, that is

(31:36):
enormous mental gymnastics. Like then say that if that's the
true case, say, see those aren'tbad.
Say that this is the problem, you're consuming too much bar
food and so on and so forth. Don't bait and switch though.
Don't be like, yeah, yeah, yeah,sedo sedo, sedo, sedo sedo's a
problem. Oh, they're not really the
problem. They're just putting people in a

(31:57):
bad position to eat other thingsthat are the problem.
OK. That is not at all what you're
saying. Right?
So that's my push back on there.And then #3 the other ones in
the States, at least, because ofwhat's happening with the Maha
movement. The the third argument that
they'll generally make is it's not necessary about the sedo's
per SE is showing how though when the people speak, we can

(32:19):
make changes to massive food conglomerates again, then just
don't lie about the fact that the sea Dolls are so detrimental
and OK, so that there's a lot ofnuance and complexity to that
thing, but overwhelmingly I I just don't think that's a good
approach. And there's so many other things

(32:40):
you could do to demonstrate thatwhen the people speak and that
people are interested and there is financial rewards for
companies who make healthier products.
Those are good things. But to ban an oil like that and
to then come out and say things like, oh, yeah, beef tallow is

(33:01):
perfectly healthy. So as long as you fry your
burgers and beef tallow, I mean you have to have a special level
of like nuts. But there is a lot of nuts
online. But like you, how can you
cogently say that and be like, yeah, that makes sense.
It it just like does not. So it's unfortunately one of
those things where I understand marketing enough and I

(33:23):
understand public health messaging.
You can't speak in nuance in those positions, or at least
people traditionally don't. And this is the one of the
problems this introduces is whenyou have the speaking heads, the
same person as a scientist, you force the scientist into a
marketer and that leads to problems because then that
person has to say like you have to say 1 clear message, the

(33:44):
message to the public. Seed oils are dangerous.
Seed oils are danger if you giveany nuance, 2 stories mean no
stories. And, and I hope we made it
through COVID with the realization of like, OK, enough
of that. Like enough of that.
We have to treat adults like adults.
And this is one thing I will saywhat the Maha people are doing
is that is one of their principles that I fully endorse

(34:04):
and support and thank them for. Yes, give the public more credit
for intelligence. I don't care that if you feel
like you're going to lose them, we should know as close to the
truth as there and don't whitewash it over because you
think everyone is a, you know, low intellect person.
So tell people the truth and with as much reason as possible

(34:27):
as you can and and as close as you can tell us the truth.
So I appreciate the fact that they're like trying to do that.
But yes, the seed oil push. And so, to my dear friends on
that side of the aisle, your your arguments are terrible as
plainly as possible. How do you have this
conversation off air with your friends that are like very
against seed oils? I don't.
You don't. It's like politics.
You just don't do it. I generally, this is the most

(34:49):
political thing I've ever done in public, probably in my life.
So you're welcome that you pulled that one out.
Yeah. Thank you.
Because I, I generally hate to do it because I'm just going to
get a onslaught of Commons and Idon't think any of them will
beat those four general positions that I just said.
But we're still going to get it.And it's just not helpful.
Like this is the thing we're talking about of all the other

(35:12):
interesting ways and things and tools and stuff we can do for
improving humankind. Like what we're going to
spending billions on is fucking seed oils.
That was our shot. Like you had one shot to change
how healthcare works in America and the bullet you've toes to
fire was seed oils do. You know where it's actually
like this mental height because I've just see, I see it

(35:33):
everywhere. Where did it start from?
Well, I'm, I'm not going to answer that question.
I know the answer, but I'm not going to because it would
involve name calling and, and like putting it on people.
And that's like, I don't like todo that positive or negative.
That's something I never do and I'm I won't start that here
today. You can.
Tell me you can cut me off. I'll answer it this way.

(35:56):
My assumption. When I hear and see people do
these things, I actually assume it's good intention.
But my issue has been if you look at the breadth of things
that people are doing, it's a terrible sleep, mental health,
the environmental stuff we got going on water and seed oils
were your shot. Like, Oh my gosh, it's just like

(36:17):
the food quality and kids like. So they are doing some really
awesome things, but for whateverreason they chose seed oils as
that big flag to fly to people'sattention.
And I'm like, oh man, like so many other cooler ways you could
have approached it. So last thing I'll say is I'm

(36:38):
not in those rooms. So maybe my tune would be
different if I was in those rooms.
And I understand like public messaging is very difficult
thing. But yeah, I just wish they would
like find a more interesting thing to hang their hat on to
gain attention with SO. I'm interrupting for one moment
to ask one small favour. Please subscribe to the show.

(37:01):
This helps it grow more than youknow.
And I'm so bad at asking this from you.
I'm so bad of thinking about this.
But you know, my goal was 100,000 to get to on YouTube and
I really want to bring you more content and better guests and
bigger episodes. And we can only do that with
your help together. So please do hit subscribe.
Thank you. I think the big thing about

(37:23):
public messaging that I feel in the health space is now it's
become very marketable. That's the problem.
So it becomes very fear mongering and isolating to such
specific things. That's where it begets worrying.
That's where there's no debate. And I think that nutrition is
one of the most debated topics of the moment.
Yeah, you want to move a productand not even that, you want to

(37:46):
just gain following, just terrify a group.
That's all you have to do. It's really funny.
Are you familiar with Malcolm Gladwell?
Yeah, 20 / 20 years ago he wrotethis unbelievable article.
I, I still have it. I send it.
I used to send it to every student in my class.
And he out in that article he outlined I think it's like 6
steps that every fad diet takes.Sir, you'd be stunned.

(38:11):
It's the same exact recipe. Tell me the 6th.
Step, it's the same. I don't remember off the hand,
but it's something like you start off with fear and death,
right? And so you're like, my mom died
of cancer. Oh, great.
Sympathy, attention and impact is made.
OK. And then you move on from fear

(38:31):
to hidden science, right? And the hidden science is like,
well, yeah, my team found a study buried in the archives,
you know, in South Africa, hidden in the bottom of a
library was buried and kept awayfrom you.
And now we're the only people that know about this thing as if
the scientific community like didn't read the paper and.

(38:52):
You can cherry pick any study you want to make any claim you
want. And that's one of the biggest
things that I have to feel like I have to say when any health
documentary comes out, even if I'm for or against whatever
they're saying, I'm like, you can make any documentary on
anything you want and scare people because you can cherry
pick evidence like there's no tomorrow.
If there's one health practice Iwould ask people to do that's

(39:13):
never watch a health documentary.
Yeah. Thank you.
They're nothing but rubbish. Yeah, see that?
Use your term there. The rest of the playbook is
something like, then you put an anecdote behind it.
Oh, so my mom died of cancer. Then we found this study that
showed that when you drink waterout of the live well be well cup

(39:34):
that you'll never die. And so then I'm on this mission
now and you put all this like emotion behind it.
And then when you start actuallylistening to the content, you're
like, there's no content there. Storytelling.
This is storytelling and emotion, right?
And then one of the key aspects is you have to pin it on one
thing. It is the seed oils, it's the
gluten, it's the dairy, it's themeat, it's the water quality.

(39:57):
It's that like there has to be avillain so that people can go.
And the reason that's important is because that creates hope.
I've tried ABCDEI, tried the basics, I tried the lifestyle
stuff. I did all those things and this
didn't go away. My brain fog didn't go away.
My stomach didn't feel any better.
I didn't get the muscle growth Iwas hoping for.
I'm still not happy. Oh, maybe it's all the gluten.

(40:20):
Oh my God, could it be this? Oh, yeah.
Oh, study. It was in a study.
Great. When this person's mom, like,
died. This person really is into it.
Emotions there. I've never tried that before.
What if it's this? What if it's what if it's this?
And the hope is encompassing you.
You can't walk away from that. And then people try it and what
happens? The overwhelming majority of

(40:42):
people feel nothing because it wasn't really the thing.
And then 10 people go, holy hell, my life just changed
because it did. It's.
Par placebo. It's par placebo, but let's just
say it's real. Yeah.
OK. Do you think certain amount of
people who buy a special water filter actually get better?
Yeah, they could. They did, absolutely.

(41:03):
That's absolutely. They let the throw a placebo
even out. Let's say that is a real
possible thing. You might have a micronutrient
deficiency. You actually could have problems
with gluten. All those things are real.
And so there's enough evidence and realness to that that these
people can support and be like, see, here's another example.
See, here's another example. And then people are to go, holy

(41:25):
shit. And then one of the final steps
is you pin everything back against the establishment.
But they're hiding this from youbecause they want to sell you
supplements. They're hiding this from you
because they want you sick. And now you have an enemy.
You have something to attack, and you have rationale to
understand why this was kept from you.
And almost all of it is nonsense, right?

(41:46):
And there's a sprinkling of truth.
And then occasionally a paper comes out, or occasionally
someone does it and you're like,see, it was real.
But you're like, no, no, no, no,like we're still there.
And then enough anecdotes and stories come out.
But what you don't see is the fact that those 20 stories, or
let's say 10,000 stories come out of success, which you don't

(42:08):
see is the fact that 6 million people tried it and 5.99 million
it did nothing for. But you see 10,000 stories and
you're like, Oh my God, there's so many stories.
This must be A and so it's not the exact way that Malcolm wrote
it, but it's pretty close to theplaybook he had.
And so then people go in and they come back out and then in

(42:30):
and come back out and see you watch, go back and look at the
playbook of seed oils. Go back and look at what gluten
did. Go back and look at what
CrossFit did. Go back and look at what you can
name all these things that have come in.
And I don't think like calling them fads is the right way
because they're not all just totally wrong.
I promise you, with my life, if somebody were to right now, full

(42:50):
stop, the next person walking onthe street, if the only thing we
told them was stop eating seed oils and they looked and Googled
where they're getting seed oils from and they stopped eating
seed oils, there's a reasonable chance that person's life gets
better. Probably didn't matter the seed
oil, but it is true. Processed foods, basically.
Bingo. Yeah.
Bingo. Bingo.
Bingo. Right, They I.

(43:11):
Think that's the one Nutrition part that everyone agrees on it.
Is it is actually pretty complicated because processing
is like, well, technically dairy's processed.
Yeah, but you got ultra processed, processed.
What is the specific definition of ultra process versus
processed? I should know this because I
actually spoke about this yesterday on a panel.

(43:32):
So this is the problem. There's 4 stages to different
processing of food. And there's not an official like
100% internationally agreed. Upon no, that's the problem.
There's like a few different terms on how people kind of vary
this. Yeah.
And so like what Kevin has done,Kevin Hall at NIH, like he's
done such insanely helpful work there.

(43:52):
But it is, it is a pretty complicated one.
It is a little bit of common sense though, right.
So if if we like avoid that nitpicking and go, OK, if you
just stick to mostly real Whole Foods and if you want to call
that process versus not like we're basically talking about
the same thing. What we're generally saying is
like, avoid most of that stuff 1/3 grader would know as.

(44:15):
I kind of say if you look at a back of a label and it's got
like 20 ingredients you don't recognize.
No, that's a bad way too. Really.
Why you? Don't have a degree in
chemistry? You do.
I mean, I if I, if I get someoneto look at the back of a label
and they don't understand most of the words in that
ingredients, then you have to understand it, but most of the
words you know. I'm going to fully disagree
here. Why?

(44:36):
Because they don't have chemistry backgrounds so.
For example, E number, E number,E number, E number, E number.
But you would be like, naturallythat's not a good food to eat.
No, again, because what you're actually talking about is a food
labeling issue. So depending on where you're at,
there are different laws on whathas to be on labels and what
doesn't have to be on label. So if you get to a place that

(44:57):
has more restrictions and it says you have to label products
more and somebody has to legallywrite dihydrogen monoxide, you
know, like I don't recognize that word.
That's bad. Oops.
Like we're drinking water here. So just because you don't
understand what chemicals are and then chemicals per SE, like
aren't bad. Again, like conceptually I'm

(45:19):
totally with you, but in terms of actual practice, it doesn't
really matter that you understand what a chemical is or
isn't. It doesn't.
I don't if you have a, a fifth grade level education, it
doesn't make a food more or lesshealthy because you do or don't
know what that thing is in it. Some things come with really

(45:39):
fancy chemical names that are completely inert or positive,
right. So if you didn't know what
magnesium was and you're like, well, they have this food has
magnesium in it, you would have the same reaction as, you know,
red dyes. Of magnesium as well that people
also are unaware of. But yeah.
So I think the easier, probably safest approach is eat Whole

(46:04):
Foods. We all agree with what a whole
food is a single ingredient natural state food.
If that is the bulk of your diet, you've probably avoided
the labeling problem because you're just not buying things in
containers often as much We've we've avoided the process versus
ultra process like that. The average person like does not

(46:24):
know or care about like science dorks.
And you know, nutrition geeks like us are like fighting over
it. But like every person is like,
what are you babbling about? Like, I do not care what should
I eat? I'm just trying to get it
figured out. So if you just you're like, all
right, eat foods in the closest to natural state.
OK, so here's what that means. If I'm going to eat some

(46:45):
Peaches, what's the best choice?If the only thing you're
thinking about it is eat it in its most natural state, you're
just going to eat the Peach. Great if though, we're deciding
between canned Peaches and pop tarts, the canned Peaches are
still the better option. It's closer to the more natural
state than the Peach flavored pop tart.

(47:08):
So I I I'd like personally, I think that's just a little bit
more. It's still, I think user
friendly and it's a little bit more accurate than the like the
other approaches. That said, if that heuristic
allows people to just go great in my brain, I'm the, you know,
Coach said don't eat things witha bunch of stuff on the label

(47:28):
that's going to translate to a lot of people as eat real food.
But what about protein bars? There you go.
I'm just going to keep caveating.
That's my point, right? Whole processed foods with a
load of ingredients with stuff you don't know how to pronounce.
OK, what do people think about protein bars?
If you're asking me what do I think is a better overall health
practice, eating a whole food protein source or protein bar,

(47:52):
my answer will always be the whole food protein source.
No question. Eat it in its most natural state
as often as you can. But now the question is OK,
that's not available or whatever.
What is a secondary option then?Maybe a protein bar with the
least amount of processing, the least amount of ingredients
like, but we're not getting as good as the natural.
But that's when we're going to the ingredients list for sure.

(48:14):
So how do people then figure that out?
So if you want to get but we have to acknowledge we're on
option 2 now, not on option one.But that's what I mean.
So if we're actually trying to like navigate a supermarket
because 2/3 of our shopping baskets are full of ultra
processed foods, that's just sadly where we are now.
Yeah, for some folks. That's like, well, that's a
stats as of today. And I think people will, you

(48:38):
know, naturally be pulled towards marketing.
And it's like high fibre, like 23 micronutrients.
It's all over the bars. And so people are so confused
that people that I know that arealso highly intelligent,
intellectual high performers arestill tied towards the amount of
DMS that I get about what about this protein product?

(48:59):
What about this liquid drink? And obviously you can't name
them because I don't want to take them down.
But like there's so many brands out there that are marketed as
extremely healthy and very smartpeople who know the difference
between Whole Foods. That's why I tried to get to the
ingredients labels because people are like, well, it look
at all these claims, they can't save if it's not healthy.
And I'm like, they can, well, they can easily.

(49:21):
OK, so I I see your I don't recognize.
You see my point? I do, but here's here's all I'm
saying when people ask us that exact question and I've been my
my poor students across the globe are going to be like, Oh
my God, he's going to do the thing because I've been doing
this for a very long time. I have the what I call stare at
you in the face rule. I do not answer questions about

(49:43):
which one of these two products is better.
I do the I blankly stare at you in the face and if I stare at
you uncomfortably in the face long enough, people will start
squirming because that's the natural thing to do, right?
When people stare at you, especially with a dismissive non
happy look on their face, right?It is like why I do that is

(50:05):
because most people will go we're we're we're like splitting
hairs between like a shitty product and a little bit less
shitty product, right. And I'm like, yeah, you're
playing the game of least bad. I'm trying to play the game as
Max good. So the way I'd answer that is
stare in the face and go, is that the single best choice you
can make? If you're not making the best

(50:27):
choice you know you can make, and you're asking me to help you
decide between option D&D minus,I'm not going to do that.
I. Just don't think people think
they know they're going to AD and D minus.
That's completely agree. That's the scary part because I
was on a podcast the other day and I'm not going to name names.
Great guy, really like him but he brings.

(50:47):
Out this and go figure out who it was.
Date stamp this thing. He'll know he's listening to
this and he's great and we had this conversation.
We also had it offline where he will put two products that are
similar, ultra processed or processed and batch them against
each other. And I'm like, I have a problem
with that because we're miss messaging.
And he's like, yeah, but people don't have time.

(51:08):
People are tired. People are, I'm trying to show
that you can half your sugar by eating this product versus this
product. Similar, right?
I'm in the camp that you're in. But then I'm like, it's booming
and people are obsessed with it.And people are like, oh, OK,
well if I'm going to make a choice, I'm going to make that 1
instead of that one. It's, it's really hard though,
because there's too many variables you have to optimize

(51:29):
for. There's too many.
For example, OK, generally when you talk about things that come
at a lower caloric intake in terms of processed food, you're
usually exchanging that for something else and that person
may not want that something else, but that something else
might be worse. This could be often times it's

(51:50):
gotten better, but historically things that were low sugar were
higher fat. Not that fat is bad, but you've
gone right back up. All you've done is switched them
out. And so if it's just like general
health, well, fat and carbohydrate intake is very
variable. It's not 1 is better than the
other one or low fat often has meant.

(52:11):
High sugar. Bingo.
So there's an exchange you're making here.
You didn't. You don't know what that client
wants to stop to my. SO if the exchange is also
minimal calories, fine, that probably then means you're
getting way more processed ingredients because it has to
taste and have a palate and a mouthfeel and a smell and a
texture that are going to come with a whole bunch of other

(52:33):
substitutes, which might be fine.
They also might hurt people's stomachs more or have other
things that, you know, down the line, short or long term, we
don't want. So I, I struggle with those
things and I'm like, again, we're playing a game of like
crummy versus a little bit less crummy.
And I don't know what you're trying to optimize for.
That's great. But you have to acknowledge what

(52:54):
he and I don't have no idea who this person is.
What he is determining as betteris a matter of perspective.
One of the best things my old professor ever told me is that a
good scientist will always try and prove their own hypothesis
wrong. That that that is.
That's the only way your argument gets stronger.
Because you're always trying to keep researching and seeing if
like the research has changed. And that's the thing.

(53:15):
I think we're always trying to see what's coming up.
And there is. And I think that's the
frustration with the public, right?
Because one minute they feel onething is good and then they're
like, oh, actually that was bad.But that is science.
The the the whole like a little bit insider baseball here.
The entire way that the scientific field moves now is
different than it was historically.

(53:37):
It is definitely changed. The quality of individual papers
now is far lower than it used tobe because of that.
So getting published is different now than when it used
to be used to be a huge deal. Getting tenure is different.
Like the like all these markers have really substantially
changed. And so that has changed how the
public has to perceive the value.

(54:01):
I could say it very bluntly. The value of an individual
publication means less now than it ever has in the history of
the world. And because there's so many out
there, what you said earlier, you can cherry pick and find one
that can prove just about anything you're trying to say.
Absolutely. It's a difficult landscape for

(54:21):
sure. So I had this question this week
from a woman who stood up. She said I'm in my 40s, like
early 40s. And you haven't got an answer
directly to her. But this is just a very general
question. You know pre menopausal and have
kids and I just really struggle to stay healthy.
Like what do you advise? Like how can you help me?

(54:45):
What a great question. I think if you're listening,
there's a large chance you're like, that's me.
I mean, what a common, common thing.
And there's good reason for that.
Raising kids is really hard. Generally falls more on the
responsibility of the woman thanthe man.

(55:06):
And then also if you're trying to have a career on top of that,
you go to 0. It's, it's just a really real
thing that happens. It's also at the time where what
worked in your 20s probably doesn't, you don't have the
energy, you are way more fatigued.
Your mental load is high and youhaven't transitioned into a life

(55:27):
because your kids are probably younger at 40 where you're,
you're still managing the whole house or large port.
Like this is just a lot going on.
And then you're supposed to be on top of your health too.
And OK, super challenging. So the answer to that question
would be like, what can you do? What I say is find one thing,
one thing that you can control that is a positive lifestyle

(55:49):
thing. And just like lock onto that
thing with the grip. If this is protecting your time
for sleep, if this is protectingself-care, time, your personal
time. A lot of the times I say that
because even if you're an introvert, extrovert, the one of
the major challenges with moms in that age range is they get no

(56:11):
space, right? Because they get space, work,
kids, spouse, family, like everyone always wants them.
Whether that's true or not, manywomen feel that's the truth.
Again, it's not always same, butwe're we're having broad
generalizations of characterizing every female 40
is the same person. But it's interesting because
when I spoke to a happiness expert from UCL, he said people,

(56:34):
elites, and it's very hard to like define what happened is
it's a very nuanced word and a fleeting, A fleeting emotion.
But he said you see this kind ofbell shaped curve where it goes,
it dips in mid age because your parents are getting older,
you've got young kids, you're trying to be like at the top of
your career at work, you have somany responsibilities and like
basically no time for yourself. And then your basic happiness

(56:57):
starts to increase again. Like once your parents pass and
once your kids get to an older age of 18, you have a bit more
freedom. Dramatic event that women will
ever go through in their life onaverage is childbirth.
It is a insanely physically and emotionally difficult thing and
most people have no strategy with that.

(57:19):
You just like get through it, right?
And So what that does is one of the single, if not these single
biggest creator of clinical sleep disorders in women is
pregnancy. So you can create legitimate
clinical sleep disorders throughthat.
Postpartum depression is a very real thing.
We could go on. Body weight, weight gain, right?

(57:40):
So like the biggest contributorsto all these things, sleep
disorders, body composition, mental health, like childbirth
is the center of that for women if you have a child, right?
So it's a huge thing. And we generally don't do
anything about it. We give very little.
Like just get through it, OK? There's like your OB who's

(58:00):
handling the birth and stuff. But the other things we, we
actually created a program at absolute rest where we have
three months when we're trying to conceive, like if people are
at that stage like intentionallytrying to conceive and then
different strategies that happenduring pregnancy, different
strategies specific in the thirdtrimester and then different
strategies for like the nine months post birth.

(58:23):
Why the demands in this is specific to sleep and the
solutions differ very, very muchso in those individual stages.
But there's no education, there's no information, there's
no things like that. You're just like, as a, you
know, mom, you just like, just get through it, right?
You just try to survive. You just try to survive for

(58:44):
sure. So my answer to that again
specific question was like, findthe thing.
If it's the personal space you need, fine.
If it is exercise, fine. If it is, you need to chat with
your friends once a week for an hour, whatever it is you have to
do, just try to get that one thing and just hold that true

(59:05):
and say, and it's you fail. Like again, I have two young
kids, my wife is 44. So like, I know I know this
avatar like very clearly and we fail miserably all the time and
all the stuff that happens, right?
And we're not perfect and we've done different things, but that
would be the one resounding thing where I'm like, you have
to have something that's yours, that's non negotiable.

(59:26):
That is your complete thing. And she still, regardless of
that, will give up that thing for the kid when I'm like, don't
know, like I'll do that, but OK,OK, so moms are just like going
to do that. Fine, you're going to fail a ton
of times, but just have something that you try to come
back to. So as not a mom.

(59:48):
But what about nutrition? Because she said to me how she
followed her question on with that because she was like,
protein's such a big thing. Should I be having more protein?
She's like I'm just so confused.Yeah.
OK, so again, the the most traumatic thing most women will
go through is having a kid. Why that matters is your taste
buds will change and other things like that.
So the nutrition aspect of it islike meat is a common one.

(01:00:11):
Sometimes after pregnancy, womenare just like I cannot eat meat,
the smell of it. Or whatever, I'm out.
So yeah, push protein, sure. But if you're like, Oh my God,
it makes me feel nauseous, then I would be like, don't then
maybe maybe chill on it. Don't have to worry about that.
My my stomach. My my wife has this weird like
stomach pain thing with eggs. Happened for years when she got

(01:00:33):
pregnant, went completely away, craved a ton of eggs and then
have the kids came right back. It's like can't even get.
So do the best you can with whatyour body is telling you.
And if a food like fruit in thisparticular case that you know is
really good for you and your body is just like, Nah, fine.
Don't let it get you down. Let it go.
You don't want it. All good smoothies.

(01:00:56):
Oh my God. So like never a smoothie again
for Natasha. Like, OK, fine.
So these things are now off the table.
She wants to eat them. She but she's just like, I can't
OK, even though it's been 7 years since our first kid, she's
just like not there. So the protein or the the
recommendation specifically would be you know the numbers,
you know the guidelines A. Bit higher than the guidelines.
I believe that each being a little bit more protein than

(01:01:18):
what we're saying in the national guidelines right now.
I think it's I think it's like low and also it's based on
sedentary old men in. The UK anyway.
Not true, Not necessarily fully true.
There's there's more nuance to that.
But if that is causing huge, what kind of point I was trying
to get to is like, if that's causing huge problems and you're
just like hating your relationship with food and it's
stressing you a ton. My answer was like, it's OK.

(01:01:39):
Then it's like, let it go a little bit.
You'll be fine. Right.
So the numbers with protein specifically, there are
databases of men and women, by the way.
So we, we have reasonable information on women.
It's it's not all just based on men.
That's another like really common fallacy.
Actually. It's like weird, these things
get said and you're like, have you actually looked?
Not used to be like people say these things and I'm like, have

(01:02:01):
you ever looked? Because it's right there.
Like it is very much available. But they're so I think, do you
think they're too low? It depends on what you're
finding is too low. So remember, generally the
recommendations are saying things like what's the minimal
amount we think the average person should have?
They're not what is optimal for body composition.
They're not what is best to helpyou keep your calories down and

(01:02:22):
that's not really what they're intended to be.
So the, I mean, Stu Phillips hasdone a great job in this areas.
One of the, the most prolific protein guys in Canada, Luke Van
Loon. Actually over here in Europe, a
lot of people have done this andthere's really not a compelling
piece of evidence that suggests you have to be at 2.2g per pound

(01:02:45):
to be healthy. I, I don't think you can
actually make that argument. You can make the argument that
that number is OK, it's not detrimental to your health.
There is an argument though, if you fall below like 1.6 to 1.4g
per kilogram, that that might negatively impact your health.
So if you ask me right now, Andy, what is your personal

(01:03:07):
recommendation of rote intake? I personally recommend 2.2g per
kilogram. Yeah, but it's so much higher.
That's not actually what I think.
If you said, Andy, what do the data show in terms of the
minimal amount you need to be perfectly healthy?
The data show you can go far lower.

(01:03:27):
I like to go higher personally when I for myself and when I
coach people because I think it has all those other advantages
and it keeps your, it's easier to maintain calories.
You can, I think you can train harder and recover faster and
blah, blah, blah. But you don't have to eat higher
to be healthy. And so when it comes to like the

(01:03:49):
guidelines, I wish they would goup a little bit, but I I don't
think you can actually make a scientific argument that the
guidelines for minimal amount ofprotein should be at 2.2g per
kilogram. No, but that's like way of a
double what they are right now like that needs to come up like
we're we're lower than the US here.
What is it? Do you know I?

(01:04:09):
Think we're zero. No, we're less .8.
Yeah, we're .8 for a woman. And I just think like even just
increasing it minimally to one point, you know, as like
deficiency. I'm not saying we need to.
I also don't believe in crammingand protein.
Like I don't think we should like be pushing, pushing,
pushing. But I do think that's what we're
saying. It's like the minimum.

(01:04:29):
And I do think that's too low. I think it needs to come up a
little bit, especially as we age, especially through things
like pregnancy and things like that.
I think we do need to just push it up slightly for people.
You're going to you're never going to see me write a program.
Of 0.8 right? No, never.
So that's that's what that was my original argument of I don't
not pushing 2.2. If you, if I got to vote on if I

(01:04:52):
can move the guidelines up, I'd be voting yes as fast as you
possibly can. Yeah, but you, the reason I'm
pulling out the distinction is because I do see a lot of people
making this and saying, oh, you need to be at 2.2 to be healthy.
Yeah, no, I'm not saying that's not.
True at all. No, that's also a lot for people
to eat. Really hard.
Some, some, some of our people just smash protein and they get

(01:05:13):
to 2.63 like no problem. And then others are like, OK, so
like, like, you need me at 95? Like, yeah, yeah, OK, that's
half. Like, no, I need you at 150.
You're a reasonable size person if you're 85 kilos.
Like, all right, we're standing on the barrel of 200 grams of

(01:05:35):
protein a day. It's a good chunk.
Like, that's a hard thing to get, especially if you don't
like meat or especially if you're like, OK, I don't want to
eat protein bars and protein shakes.
How am I going to get to 165g when I don't have time to cook
three meals of fresh meat every day?

(01:05:55):
Yeah, and protein distribution. I mean, this is a whole
conversation. It's super hard, right?
So you can get there. I mean, we, we published just a
few months ago, we published ourintermittent fasting study and
one of the issues we had the most was look, it's just hard to
get all of the calories in, in the condensed window because in.

(01:06:18):
An 8 hour window or a six hour window?
8 hours? 8 hours.
Now we were different because wewere the first group to look at
that form of that 16-8 intermittent casting.
Statue pandas work. Well, we're the first group to
look at it in a hypercaloric state.
It was not a fat loss study. Those have been done.
Grant Tins, he's done a ton of those things.
We were looking at what happens if men and women are trying to

(01:06:38):
gain muscle? Can I still do 16-8?
Does it provide an advantage if I do it?
So we, we again, we were lookingat and so the challenge was like
we're supposed to be in the caloric surplus intentionally.
We're definitely going to be at 2.2 or higher protein.
And now you're starting being like, OK, now I got to get 150
grams in and I got 8 hours. You're like, this is tough.

(01:07:02):
That's. A lot.
To do so. How often were they eating?
So in this particular study design, the fasted group trained
fasted and then they all waited at least an hour to start their
eating window. So the, the men and women all
did that. And So what typically would that
would look like is people would start their eating windows like
pretty traditionally, like 12 toone, sometimes 2:00 PM because

(01:07:25):
these are called kids. So they know something a little
bit later. And so they would eat, you know,
in their eight hour window from that.
So, so most of them would eat a meal right when it started and
then they would have three or someals in that 8 hour window.
But sometimes it was like 2 and you're just having giant meals.
Some tried to get in like 3 or 4.
So we allowed them to kind of have distribute whatever they

(01:07:47):
could, the group in the other window would eat before
training, would eat and have a, a, a liquid meal immediately
after training. And then they can distribute the
amount of meals they want or however they want as long as
their total window was over 13 hours.
So they're start to stop. And so most of them would do a
pretty traditional three whole meals plus my, my shake after

(01:08:10):
and then maybe a couple of other, you know, feedings
throughout the day. So that's just that was again,
we didn't specifically control the frequency of feeding, but
that's what it ended up being and what it looked like.
And what did the results say? Which group did the best?
It's, it's never an, it's never a straight answer.
There's pros and cons, as you would expect.
So everybody got better, the mengot better, the women got

(01:08:34):
better. They're all fasting, they're all
waiting over an hour past their exercise.
Nobody had an issue. They were strength training four
days a week in the gym with us, and the way that the strength
training program worked is everysingle day they would do a Rep
to failure, so many repetitions as they can, and then the
weights would increase that nextsession.

(01:08:58):
And so they were training really, really hard.
At the same point, we were also checking their weight every
week. If their weight wasn't going up,
they got more calories. So we continued like we were
really making sure that they were in a caloric surplus no
matter what, as defined not onlyby the estimates and the
guessing on calories, but actually directly being defined

(01:09:19):
as are you gaining weight. So we forced them to gain
weight. Everybody got better for the
most part, but there were some subtle differences.
The fasting group in general started to have less energy
towards the end of the study. Anecdotally, really challenging
to get. Actually the carbohydrates was

(01:09:41):
the harder problem to get in because they were in a, you
know, pretty high carbohydrate load.
GI distress was more associated with that, like really high
because some of these people areon 56700 grams of carbohydrate
today because we had some reallybig men, right.
So we have 100K guys in there insurplus and you're at 6 to 8g
per kilogram body weight. Yeah, I can imagine GI distress

(01:10:02):
coming along there. Yeah, so I mean it was not that
often, but that happened. Everyone got stronger but the
non fasting group got more strong so that the group that Ed
and fed throughout the day got more strong.
Specifically in the legs, the total amount of volume so the
amount of exercise that they canperform.

(01:10:23):
The amount of petitions was better in the group who fed.
But that said body fat was better in the fasting group.
So now our study was limited as all studies are.
We were only 8 weeks long. This is only in college kids,
but you know, you can still drawsome interesting information out

(01:10:47):
of that. So I, I would say in general,
what did we find? Either approach is fine.
They both worked. You if you want to, if you like
training faster in the morning, male or female and you don't
want to eat afterwards, there's no issue there.
Think you're going to be fine. And there's lots of other
fasting studies that have done that.
It's just there's just not a problem with that.

(01:11:08):
The caveat to that story is if you are training multiple times
a day, then timing for carbohydrate does start to
matter because you have a limited glycogen resynthesis
window. But protein timing just like
doesn't seem to matter at all. As long as the total number is
there for the overall majority of people, that's what.
Is that more? If you're doing an aerobic

(01:11:29):
course, it's still the same as if you're doing.
It doesn't really seem to matterthe glycogen.
The only exception would be if your total training volume is
really, really high and, or if you're doing multiple sessions
per day. So a lot of our combat sport
athletes, well all of them are training twice a day, every day.

(01:11:49):
So in those cases, timing matters because we actually have
like 3 hours to recover and thenyou're training again and then
we're going to do it again the next day.
But for the average person who'sexercising once per day, it just
doesn't seem to matter that much.
And protein specifically, like the timing just doesn't seem to
matter, like really at all. Not even if because everyone

(01:12:11):
says have protein within 30 minutes post training.
No, no, no, no, that that's beenlong dispelled.
That was the thing that we used to call the post exercise
anabolic window. And that was something that was
kicked around for a long time. And now there is molecular data,
there are randomized control trials, there's there's multiple
year long studies. Now we, we've done this again
like in our lab a few times and there's enough thing, this is

(01:12:32):
actually one thing that we can say pretty definitively, protein
timing from a body composition perspective, it doesn't matter
as long as you get the total number in we actually say in the
day. But the reality of it is it's
actually like probably more realistically. 24 hours of the
week. Oh really?
OK. So if you, for example, had 120

(01:12:55):
grams of protein today and 160 tomorrow, as long as your weekly
average, you're probably fine. Like now you want to be
consistent as possible to make sure you hit that number and you
don't end up with Sunday and you're like, shit, I need 290
grams of protein today. Like you don't want to do that.
So consistent is important, but being at it because your body
doesn't necessarily work on a 24hour clock like that.

(01:13:20):
The other, I think major take away from our study was OK if
you're training really hard and really pushing the pace in this
case is was this was lifting? There's no endurance component
at all. But energy did come down.
Sleepiness started to increase in the fasting group and the
legs just looked like they got tired.
I wish we had muscle glycogen data on this.

(01:13:41):
We didn't, we biopsied them. We ran all the, the biopsy stuff
we use for other markers. And once we we ran all that
stuff we like, oh man, this is it.
We didn't think this is going tohappen.
And so there's just no tissue left to to go do this.
So like if you were to do it again, I would say, OK, measure
muscle glycogen. So this is just me guessing to
be really clear, but it just kind of looked like, all right.

(01:14:03):
The closest conclusion we could draw here is fasting's probably
not the best approach if you're trying to maximize strength.
If you just kind of want to get a little bit stronger, but you
like not eating in the morning, it's better for you.
It's more convenient. You don't, your stomach gets
upset, then I would say, OK, then it's fine.
Too fast. I don't think you're going to

(01:14:23):
see any issues there. But if you're like no, no, no, I
need to be at maximum muscle growth and maximal strength
development, specifically strength development, then I'd
say OK, don't. If you can avoid fasting, then
do that. For everyone.
Or just put the trainer all the time, three times a day.
You're just training once a day.Even once a day because our
group is training once a day. Yeah, OK.

(01:14:44):
And it mattered. To not fast, yeah.
Eat like. You probably want to have a
bigger window than that. The other side equation would be
if you're trying to kind of get a little bit stronger or don't
even care about strength, but you're trying to just optimize
body composition, maybe intermittent fasting is better.
Again, our limited data suggested that the body
composition benefits were betterin the fasting group.

(01:15:08):
Lots of limitations, right? We didn't weigh and measure
every single meal. We would.
This is not a metabolic ward study.
So there could have been under reporting or over reporting and
things like that like I don't know.
So you have options. Yeah, I guess the biggest thing
right is to like understand yourbody and to actually have the
self-awareness to be like, I feel knackered when I do this.

(01:15:31):
Yeah. Or I don't.
Completely. Because I think sometimes that
we completely lose actually how we're feeling just by running
from data. Yep, you know, fully agree.
And I think sometimes like we can get up and then we didn't
have this conversation yesterday.
But you know, with trackers and things like that, I think we can
sometimes just be so pulled by data that we forget actually how
we're feeling now. For instance, when I looked to

(01:15:54):
my sleep last night, it said I slept great, gave me like 10 out
of 10 great score. I feel tired today.
Two totally different opposing views.
I don't feel tired. I do feel tired.
I feel knackered. That's a very English word.
I'm now realizing every time I say that every American's like

(01:16:16):
it's my favorite English word, Ifeel really tired.
So basically, it's interesting. A lot of people will say, oh, if
you look at sleep trackers or whatever and they tell it that
you sleep bad but you feel good,then you'll psychologically
start to feel bad. But yesterday was different for
me. I got 10 out of 10, had great
REM sleep. I had great deep sleep.

(01:16:36):
My HIV is still off. Yeah, that was a conversation we
had yesterday, but maybe not offjust the same.
That's one of my learnings I took from yesterday.
If my HIV is consistent, even ifit's low, but I still, I don't
feel great. So I find it really interesting
that we sometimes aren't just listening to our bodies.
Yes. So there's a lot to say about

(01:16:57):
that. I think your bigger point I, I
could not give more stamps on like really paying attention to
what is effective for you and not effective without then
falling too far where you now become hypersensitive and you're
overly concerned about every little darn thing, right?
So we want to walk a balance between what we call sensitive
and resilient. So like actually at absolute

(01:17:18):
rest, we, we do this a lot, but people are like, Oh, you're a
sleep optimization program. We're like, no, no, no, no,
sleep optimization is OK, 2 1/2 hour routine, your life is
blocked out. Like we're going to get the
maximum amount of sleep. Brian Johnson.
Totally, Brian. Right.
Great. That is not what we do at

(01:17:40):
Absolute Rest. We maximize sleep resilience,
which is I want you to be able to have a chromium night of
sleep and still get the most effective sleep possible within
a constraint. Your kid woke up.
Yep. You had you were just up too
late with work or you went out and had a bottle of champagne
with your friend. Fine.
How can we get the most effective sleep within

(01:18:01):
constraints that real humans experience?
Like that's what we really trulydo.
And so when we have variables wecan control, fine, we can extend
hours and all that, but really we're trying to help develop
maximum resilience so that you can have a great night of sleep
without having to do 50,000 different things and lose all of
your sense of life there. Like that's what we're pushing

(01:18:22):
for. So that that's comment number
one. Comment number 2 is sleep and
energy are related, but they arenot the same thing.
The same thing with exhaustion and down regulation.
Those are not the same thing. You can be exhausted and highly
sympathetically driven. This is wired and tired.

(01:18:43):
Why? I think we talked about this
yesterday. We did talk about this
yesterday, yeah. These are not the same thing, so
the inverse is true then too. You can be perfectly well rested
and fatigued. You can be not sleepy at all,
but drained. They are highly related, so much
so the most people just think they are the same thing, but
they are necessarily not. So that's like my mental load is

(01:19:04):
why I feel my favorite word knackered totally.
But. You could be shocked.
Right, but I'm shocked that's the American word.
But maybe I'll get you to say knackered by the end of the
podcast, but I'm really, well, can't.
Do that one. I gave you the rubbish, I threw
that one for you. The other one, it's not going to
happen. So that's interesting.

(01:19:24):
So then my take home would be that I need to download and
because I felt like I rested last night, I stayed in.
So you again, you probably did, but there are more things that
go into your energy than just your sleep.
Right. This could be maybe you had
lower calories last few days than you realize.

(01:19:45):
Maybe your energy expenditure was higher and you realize this
may be simply a calories in, calories out.
Menstrual cycle. So we are actually running a
study right now in my lab where we are doing the first ever
detailed analysis of sleep across the menstrual.
Cycle. Oh my God, I can't wait to see
that. It's open for enrollment, so if

(01:20:07):
people want to, they have to be in the states.
I was. Going to say can I come?
Yeah. You come to states, you can do
it if you want, but we are doingthat.
And the reason is we're running,we're actually using the
technology that we've pioneered at Absolute Rest so we can run a
full medical grade clinical sleep study on people in their
homes with no wires. We can do this, all this stuff

(01:20:31):
at the, we actually have the only, we're the first ones to
have FDA approval, like our governing body in America to run
a clinical sleep study and people in a wearable, no other
wearables. There's some that can do that.
Now we were the first to get that done so we, we can run this
high fidelity stuff. And we're doing that and we put
this up because like we, we needreal answers for sleep trackers

(01:20:52):
and wearables are great because they're cost efficient.
They're affordable for a lot of people.
They can do a lot of awesome things with basic awareness and
calibration, but they're not medical research grade devices.
That's what we're using. And the other thing that's
unique about our study, we're directly measuring hormones
every day. So we're not going to estimate

(01:21:14):
ovulation at day 14. We're not going to estimate your
cycle length and just be like, well, everyone is at 28 and
ovulation is day 14 and every male listening is like, what?
And then the female's like, thank you.
Like it doesn't happen this morning, right?
You're not all the textbook. No, that's not many people are
textbook and also depends where you are in your life cycle. 1000

(01:21:38):
things right? Even a woman who is pretty
regular, maybe even they are super regular, recycle length.
They're not necessarily going toovulate on the same day every
month. No, not for flying.
Not a, not at. All right, A. 100% and a million
other things, stress load, allostatic energy expenditure,
exercise, like all these things can come out there, right?

(01:21:58):
You might not ovulate or you might not really leased an egg
and you, you have no idea, right?
So we are doing all these thingsso we can look at #1 what
actually happens with sleep across that cycle and #2 is that
actually related to a, a phase of the cycle?
And so it's like a really popular thing now to, I'll save

(01:22:20):
you for maybe Part 3, we'll do this.
But it's like really popular to put all of these protocols
behind menstrual cycle phases. And for the most part, it's,
it's nonsense. It's not based in human research
and it's definitely not based inany research that is verified
cycle. It's just does these like, oh,
you're on day 14, therefore XYZ.So like, we don't want to do
that at all. And so we're directly confirming

(01:22:43):
sleep at the highest fidelity accuracy possible and then we
are confirming exactly where thewomen are.
So every single day we're takingbiomarkers of them to do that
subjective markers on top of allthat as well.
And here's the question we're going to answer.
Hopefully there is a very clear change in perception of fatigue

(01:23:05):
and real fatigue across the menstrual cycle in in many
women, if not most, not all, buta large part.
OK. I don't think I'm going to see
much disagreement. No, you're going to get every
hand raised, and I'm very much in this camp.
Great. Now here's a question why?
And we've already been talking. It may not be your sleep.
You gave me a, you teed me up perfectly for this.

(01:23:26):
So here's our question. Is it sleep?
But it's something going on in your sleep that is not picked up
on a tracker because trackers are really ineffective and
efficient. And then they're like, they
don't give you much information.So is it something like
stability fragmentation? Sleep stages on trackers are
anywhere between 60 to 80% accurate, which means if your

(01:23:48):
variation was 20, it missed it. A sleep tracker is going to take
a measurement once every 5 minutes.
We do 150 measures per second. So is something happening in
those other 4 minutes that is just totally missed?
So it could be as simple as that.
It's just that the accuracy of the trackers is not good enough
for that question. It's good enough for tons of

(01:24:08):
other awesome stuff, but it's not good for that question.
Could be possible. This could simply be yes, there
is an architectural change in sleep at these phases of the
cycle on average, and so thus your energy changes.
Or it could have nothing to do with your sleep.
We might find, I have no idea. I don't have a dog on the fight.
Either way, if we find no changes at all in sleep

(01:24:33):
fragmentation, seek architecture, stability,
wakefulness, sleep quality like it, we actually have a again and
we have an FDA approved sleep quality measure.
We're the only ones that have actually that.
That's how good that measure is,not a random like score
generated thing. It is plausible that the the
real changes in energy throughout the cycle are driven

(01:24:56):
by nothing related to sleep and are entirely explained by energy
expenditure. We know during different phases
of your cycle, energy changes. Yeah, I can.
Something I could not stop eating yesterday.
Of course, right I. Was ravenous.
And there, well, we don't have to spend the time.
But this is very easy to explain.

(01:25:18):
What 5 phases cycle where the various hormones are AT and why
that generates bloating? Why that generates ravenous
hunger? And GI distress the whole thing
whole. Of the things right and it
makes. Total sense.
Yeah, if you're trying to mood swings, right, like all of it.

(01:25:40):
If you're trying to create a situation which you could grow
an embryo, you should have a different metabolic need than
when you're the opposite. You're losing a ton of iron for
multiple days in a row. You're going to have changes in
oxygen carrying capacity. You're going to like feel lower
energy, right? What we don't know though, is
again, is this entirely explained by energetic demands?

(01:26:02):
Is it entirely explained by sleep?
Is it a combination or is it a third factor or potentially a
fourth factor? I'll say the fourth being
something we haven't thought about or aren't thinking about
or the third one being is it none of those energy intake out
that is changing clearly, but it's it's manageable and we
simply have the hormonal changesthat are occurring are simply

(01:26:26):
giving you a perceived fatigue, which is.
Psychosomatic. It's not psychosomatic per SE
because hormones make you feel acertain.
Way. Yeah, because it is actually
happening. It is actually happening, right?
It's not psychosomatic, but it is not a like you're actually
your energy balance is the same,your intake and output blah blah
blah. So.
What would you call? I guess I said psychosomatic

(01:26:46):
because it's like you're perceived.
It is a is a hormonal driven feeling.
Right. Yeah.
That is not just simply based onenergy intake.
So what do you want to leave theLister with?
I have two things for you. As much as I think you and
Natasha are going to be best friends, I have two favors to

(01:27:09):
ask you. One, if you're listening to this
at home, you can't see, but those of you watching, you'll
see you are currently wearing black, black.
And can I call those brown shoes?
So can you please let her know as a former elite level model,
you can wear black and brown together because according to

(01:27:32):
her, this is an illegal offense that one cannot do.
It's a good thing. OK, Thank you.
Yeah. Great.
So she you're willing to say sheis dead wrong and I clearly have
a better fashion sense. Do you know what I would look
like if I ever left the house wearing the things I would just
wear? It's it's.
Bad oh how you wear it though. Yeah, well, that's probably

(01:27:54):
worse actually. Aesthetics and fashion, I could
not be worse at that's 1-2. Any of you watching might be
thinking, wait a minute, I watched Part 1 and he's wearing
the same shirt that he wore in Part 1, but he changed pants.
So what happened? Did they film this in the same
day and then he went in the bathroom and changed pants?

(01:28:15):
Did he spill himself? Did he do something else on
himself? Like why did he change pants?
One would think you can wear pants multiple days, but you're
not going to wear the same shirt.
Trousers for anyone who's English listening to trousers.
Correct. Andy is not sat here in boxer
shorts, I can assure. You fair, fair This would be.

(01:28:37):
Here's my. American.
Here's my thing. Should I reveal the people what
happened or should I leave them in suspense?
I'll tell them. Tell them.
I have two of these shirts, two of the exact same shirt.
So you did wash? I did not.
The other one is currently stillsitting at my house or at the at
the hotel dirty and so this is the second one, the clean 1.

(01:28:58):
So I put on all clean clothes today, but I wore the exact same
shirt style. But I have two of these and so
clean pants, clean clean trousers, clean socks and a
clean shirt today. I love that that short like
leaving thought for the listeners.
I just know there's people on the YouTube this whole time
being like, did anybody see these wearing the same shirt?

(01:29:19):
This is how YouTube works. Like this is the stuff like none
of the common seed oils, whatever.
It's just like. I just think you're like Steve
Jobs, he just wears the same thing everyday.
Or Stephen Barlow, he just wearsthe same.
Thing Andrew does that I'm just.Like and Andrew exactly.
He, he has a good reason for it,which I'll I'll keep to myself,
but I don't do that. Yeah.
Yeah, I mean, it's continuity. It's easier just to wear the

(01:29:40):
same thing the whole time. There's lots of reasons for it,
yeah. But you know someone who loves
fashion? I can't do that, no.
No, no. And someone who's horrible at
it, I can't do it either. So.
Third thing to come to London. We can take you shopping.
Rob makes me wear the same shirtevery show.
I'm just like, Rob, can I wear your shirt?
And he's like, no, because he doesn't trust in my choices for
sure. Number one.
And then all the other reasons it's.

(01:30:02):
Like, don't worry, I've had a guest on four times.
They've always wore the same shirt I really like.
Well, it wasn't back-to-back days.
We were like, literally there's no.
Chance every three-year period, I have to say.
Do you not have another show? Is that worse?
I think that is worse. That's worse.
I probably averaged like a 12 to15 year life on all my articles.
The the I guarantee these jeans are over 10 years old.

(01:30:22):
Well. Sustainable fashion, Yeah,
champing that, right? There I just hate.
I'm just like I'm not switching just so another thing you can
complain with Natasha about is my fashion.
The only time she tried to hire like professional people, me
like I'll hire somebody, they'regoing to do your horror
wardrobe, but you don't have to think about it and like free
sweats and a free shirt or I'm out like no chance.

(01:30:45):
I'm not doing it. And she's just like she I.
I beat her to down though she gave up many years ago.
I love that. That's the best leave in common
I've ever had in 500 episodes. Perfect.
So thank you, Andy, that was amazing.
Ready for Part 3? There you go, let's do it.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Dr. Andy Galpin: Why You’re Not Losing Fat & How Metabolism Really Works

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

Betrayal: Weekly

All Episodes

Dr. Andy Galpin: Why You’re Not Losing Fat & How Metabolism Really Works

Stuff You Should Know