Natural Physiques Newsletter Volume I Issue 4 June 11th, 2004

	You are receiving this publication due to your double opt-in at our site. If you no longer wish to receive this publication, please unsubscribe via the address listed at the top of the newsletter or with the link at the bottom. This newsletter is published the second Friday of each month. Please share this with your friends!
	Hint: this newsletter is optimized for printing! Products: Pharmaceutical-grade supplements Become the Journey Misc. Resources Business opportunity: Dream Team International Free eBooks and other personal development resources

Table of Contents

1. In this Issue
2. Quotes
3. Editorial
4. What's New
5. Exclusive: Essay 1999
6. Is a Calorie Just a Calorie?
7. Health News
8. Ending Procrastination
9. Business Development: The Power of Power Investing
10. Closing Thoughts
11. Subscription Information

1. In this Issue

*** Are you having issues with SPAM and junk e-mail? Test drive SPAM BULLY for free! ***

Welcome to the fourth issue of the monthly Natural Physiques™ Newsletter! I hope you enjoy this issue, and look forward to hearing from my readers. Feel free to contact me with your comments, suggestions, and constructive feedback!

Visit the Natural Physiques™ forums to share your story, seek advice, and offer knowledge to others!

Since we are moving to the other side of the country this month, I found a few quotes that focus on the concept of change. For the editorial this month, I am excited to talk about change, progress, the process of transformation, and how I have become the journey. Read recent articles we've published and check out our featured calculator in the "What's New" section. Uncover an essay from 1999 that I wrote when I first embraced a healthy lifestyle. Lyle McDonald, well known for his articles and books about low carbohydrate (ketogenic) diets, answers the common question: Is a Calorie Just a Calorie?. Our monthly Health News covers several late-breaking nutrition and supplementation topics. Jim Rohn shares some advice about Ending Procrastination. In Business Development, we have an excerpt from a new book by best-selling millionaire Robert Kiyosaki about "Power Investing."

2. Quotes

Only the wisest and stupidest of men never change. - Confucius

The art of progress is to preserve order amid change and to preserve change amid order. - Alfred North Whitehead

Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. - Jeremiah 13:23

3. Editorial

I think it goes without saying that I am very excited to have finally released my eBook, Become the Journey: A Transformation Guide. This book has so much history behind it, that I wanted to share a little bit with the list. It is no mistake that when I look upon an essay I wrote almost five years ago now, that the main topic was "journey." While many things in my life have changed on this journey, the journey itself has always been the drive, the why, the passion. I have a mission to change people's lives, and this is why I live my life not on a quest (which implies there would be something to retrieve and thus end the quest) but on a journey that will not end. See, changing lives is not something to do and then stop - it is a process.

I learned about process at a recent seminar that I attended. I flew to the other side of the country just one week before my move to spend three days listening to speakers like Jeffery Combs, Todd Falcone, Artemis Limpert, Mark Victor Hansen, Jerry Clark, and many others. These are all very successful people who came together to share what they felt created and empowered their success. It is no coincidence that one of the speakers, Artemis, was the champion of a major physique transformation competition in the year 2000. In fact, all of the speakers had something to say about health - not that health is necessary for success, but that the habits and mindset for success also foster good health.

It is also interesting to note that of those who were successful - some of them earning six figures every month - not a single one attributed their success to luck. They didn't just stumble into success. In fact, most of them failed - many times - before achieving their success. The majority gained their financial independence through network marketing, in different companies, through different routes, and some through other means (such as Mark Victor Hansen, who started in network marketing and then achieved great success as an author and co-author). What they all had in common, however, was a passion - a drive. They created a vision and lived that vision. They did not create a condition to reach and then stop - instead, they created a process in their lives. In other words, they became the journey instead of relying simply on the destination.

Artemis shared something that I feel everyone deserves to know. She said that we are faced with challenges in life. Many people feel that when they "pay their dues" and overcome great challenges, they should have it easy after that. Not true. Challenges are ways to grow - they are there to teach us how to master the process, so we can take on greater challenges. It's not about paying your dues and then living the easy life, instead, it is about mastering the process so that you enjoy the challenge.

These past few weeks have been a challenge for me. We finished packing, jumped into our truck to drive 1,500 miles, celebrated our six year anniversary and released my eBook all in the same week. Not bad for a bald Daddy about to celebrate his thirtieth birthday, no? And through all of this change, all of this challenge, I realized that this is it - I am in the process, and part of the journey. How exciting was that? So soaking in my hot tub overlooking the distant mountain ridge, I realized that I don't have to want because I have been blessed with so many great things - my health, my wife, my children, my faith, and the opportunity to reach others, such as you.

Thank you from the bottom of my heart for participating in this incredible process. I want to celebrate not only the launch of my eBook, which I do hope you learn and grow from, but also the contributions you have made to my own success. You see, without you, my readers and clients, I realize that none of this would have been possible. Whenever I receive an encouraging e-mail, advice, suggestions, feedback, even constructive criticisms, I grow and achieve new levels because this is not a "one man show" - it is a process that includes all of you who participate in the newsletter, the forums, and the site. So this editorial is more about thanks than anything else - thank you for coming along with me on this journey.

Best of health and success to you. Jeremy Likness

4. What's New

Featured Calculator:

Tom Venuto has released a new eBook, that you can receive as a bonus by checking out the free fitness analysis at Global Health and Fitness. We are pleased to partner with GHF to bring you several cutting edge tools, such as this one. Once you've completed the questions, you'll receive specific recommendations based on your responses, including a sample strength-training workout, the best heart rate zone to train in for your goals, and other helpful tips to help you look and feel your best.

Featured Articles

• Angela Ursprung also known as The Body Sculptress shares How to Use Fast Food to Support Weight Loss and How to Keep Your Motivation.
• Christina Chapan brings us two new fitness for kids articles, A Simple Guide to Parachute Play and Cooperation Today and Tomorrow.
• I have added my own Body Fat Percentage Guide for Men that shows what I looked like at various body fat percentages and weights. I will be working with a figure competitor to create the same article for women, so keep your eyes peeled!
• Finally, my most important announcement - is, of course, that I have finally released Become the Journey: A Transformation Guide! Not only is this eBook now available, but those who are interested in sharing it with others can check out our Affiliates Program to earn 60% of net profits on each sale - just over $18 per book (and it's free to sign up in the U.S.)!

5. Exclusive: Essay 1999

I began my journey to fitness in August of 1999. I entered a three-month contest and while I did not place during that first attempt, the experience changed my life. I have modified the company and product names to avoid any copyright or trademark infringements. This was the first "taste" I had of living healthy - and expresses exactly how I felt after only three months of changing my habits. Keep in mind I had not experienced phenomenal weight loss and I was far from seeing my abs, but I knew I was on the right path. This essay has only been published to the company that I entered the competition with, and in a weekly column I sent out when I owned Peak Physiques.

During that period of time, my life changed forever. While I lost almost 30 pounds of unwanted fat, the more important changes were to my life. I became more confident, more positive, and began to create opportunities rather than dwell on the opportunities I’d missed.

---

I have just begun the most amazing journey of my life. I can claim a victory like no other victory before this. I see the triumph not only in myself, but also in the eyes of those around me. I must give thanks from my heart to those who held my hand during this journey. My wife introduced me to this lifestyle. My son helped carry me through it. The transformation team was behind me, every day, telling me what to do, how to eat, how to focus. The company provided me with the supplements that enhanced such dramatic results. The team, and all of the champions, gave me the spirit, inspiration, and role models to achieve my goals.

My favorite mode of expression has always been poetry. This is a means by which I share experience and emotion. My before and after pictures are a snapshot of my external progress. This poem is another before and after picture, of the inside.

With bloated hands I trace the
Hated contours of my gut; this
Swollen panic grips me, the
Mirror sneers as I
Fold inside to a dark, hidden place,
Finding not control, but
An escape from it.
I gasp for breath, straining
To tie my shoes

TRANSFORM!

With hardened hands I trace the
Solid contours of my abdomen; this
Focused energy guides me, the
Mirror smiles as I
Unfold into a bright, open place,
Finding control, and
Giving it away.
I breathe deeply, smiling
As I tie my shoes.

It is amazing how something that begins with a decision to change the outside can have such an impact on what’s inside. I started this program with the one goal: get rid of my gut. What I got back from this program has completely changed my life. I have eliminated stress. I have gained a level of confidence that I never knew possible. This has enabled me to complete projects at both home and work. I built a retaining wall and filled it with dirt. I managed a million-dollar project at my job. Both of these projects were ultimately satisfying and easy to execute with my new abilities to plan, organize, and attack.

I believe that everyone wants to “get the most out of life.” Part of this is “doing the right thing.” We all know what is right and wrong when we make decisions in our lives. I felt that I was a good person, yet it was difficult to deal with the feelings of guilt and self-loathing that came with my weight. Deep down inside, every time that I attacked a stack of cookies or guzzled down cans of soda, I knew that I was doing something wrong. I was making immediate gratification more important than the long-term satisfaction of having a healthy body. This guilt stuck to me, and I wore it like a badge. It crippled my confidence and prevented me from reaching my full potential.

There were many times that I urged myself to make a change. I knew I wanted to change, but I lacked the enthusiasm and the knowledge to make the change real. The author filled the gaps. His book wasn’t just groundbreaking because it provided a workout plan and a nutrition program. It was revolutionary because it spoke to my heart, to my soul; it reached inside me and propelled me to make the right decision, the decision to change. This was the part that I was missing, the gut drive to do something. The change is simple. Proper exercise, nutrition, and supplementation can make it happen. The impetus to change is something else. I can show people my workouts, tell them about nutrition, and even offer firsthand proof that supplementation and inner drive (motivation!) will burn fat, build muscle, and transform our bodies into the stuff of dreams. The inspiration and dedication can’t be carried by words. The level of emotion that I pour from my heart is what touches and affects those around me, and propels them towards this change. I cannot wait to help the team carry this revolution to the rest of the world! The turn of the century will be about turning the world into a healthier, happier place.

---

The turn of the century has been exactly that. While I did not join the “Company Team,” I have built a team of my own. This team includes not only my wife and children, but also the amazing clients that I have been blessed to work with. As a team, we all strive to share the good news of good health that comes from proper nutrition, exercise, and positive living. The team isn’t about my company or me, it’s about health. By setting an example and leading others, you, too, can be a part of this team, and help the world become a better place as the dream of healthy living is spread from one person to the next.

6. Is a Calorie Just a Calorie? (by Lyle McDonald)

Before finally getting into a discussion of the different dietary approaches out there, I want to address one of the bigger points of contention in the dieting literature: is a calorie a calorie? Simply put, the debate comes down to this: all that matters is caloric balance (calories in versus calories out) or do the source of those calories matter?

As usual, both sides of the argument can bring lots of data to the table in support of their contentions. Frequently, as you'll see below, they end up arguing slightly different issues. In looking the topic, I want to look at three distinct data sets, each of which generates slightly different results (part of the confusion comes from comparing data from dissimilar studies).

Studies varying protein intake

Most commonly, when folks want to argue that 'a calorie is not a calorie', they will use studies comparing higher and lower protein intakes. With very few exceptions, diets providing adequate protein intake (for dieters 1.5 g/kg lean body mass or higher would be a minimum) to lower intakes find better results than diets with lower protein intakes. This is especially apparent under dieting conditions with any number of studies support the need for higher protein intake to support muscle growth.

That is, given an identical caloric intake, the group that gets sufficient protein will generally show better muscle mass maintenance than the lower-protein group. As well, since weight losses are typically similar, that means that slightly more fat is lost. Other studies show that protein blunts hunger better (meaning it's easier to reduce calories) than carbs or fats and a recent study showed better blood glucose maintenance in the diet containing higher protein. Aha, folks say, the source of the calories do matter!

Tangentially, I suspect that folks reporting better results from low-carb diets compared to higher-carb diets is related to this. Because of the reliance on meat, it's nearly impossible NOT to get sufficient protein intake on a low-carbohydrate diet; folks on high-carbohydrate diets frequently over emphasize carbs to the extent that protein intake gets shorted.

But look, I've been driving the point home for a good portion of this book that adequate/sufficient protein intake is an absolute requirement and I'll be the first to point out the results of the above studies: sufficient/higher protein intakes almost always produce better results than the converse.

However, this point doesn't apply to any of the diets I'm going to describe in this book. To get ahead of myself, after setting calories, my first priority is to set protein intakes at the proper levels (in the range of 0.8-1.5 g/lb depending on needs). The question then changes slightly: given adequate protein intake to begin with, does the source of the other calories (carbohydrates versus fat) affect anything or is it simply a calorie in versus calorie out issue. In addressing this, I want to describe two other data sets.

Studies where calories are rigorously controlled

The first set of studies, which tend to be in the minority are those studies where subject's caloric intakes are strictly controlled. These are usually the studies that the 'a calorie is a calorie' folks use to support their argument.

These studies are typically done by locking subjects in a hospital type of situation and measuring their food intake or by giving them pre-made food packets to use at home. Sometimes, studies are done in hospital patients being fed through a feeding tube. As you might imagine, these studies are hellishly expensive (especially if they are done over more than a few days) and, for that reason, aren't being done as often anymore. There is also the question of whether or not they have relevance to the real-world but that's a separate issue. I should also mention that frequently very short-term studies (looking at a single meal or a day or two of intake) sometimes find differences for different diets but these have no bearing in the real-world where you're looking at intakes over weeks or months.

However, in those studies, you generally see minimal (if any) differences in terms of the amount or composition of the weight lost when you vary the different nutrients. Studies have compared high to low-carbohydrate diets and even varying low-carbohydrate diets. With minor slop (maybe a pound or two here or there), any differences in the total amount of weight loss or the composition of the weight lost (again this assumes adequate protein intake in the first place) are very minor. Rather, the majority (easily 90% or more) of the change can be attributed directly to the caloric intake of the diet. Macronutrient composition makes a tiny, approaching negligible difference.

I should mention that studies comparing high to low-carbohydrate diets typically show greater weight losses in the low-carbohydrate group but this can generally be attributed to greater water losses. One or two studies have shown a slight trend towards greater fat loss in the low-carbohydrate group but it's rarely huge.

Of course, athletes and bodybuilders will retort that few studies are done in very lean individuals and this is very true. It's possible that an athlete trying to get to single digit bodyfat levels might find a given diet to produce superior results (I'll mention a few possible situations in the next chapter) but it's poorly studied.

On that note, I have had the benefit of receiving endless feedback from athletes and bodybuilders who have compared various diets at the same calorie level. In general, differences in terms of fat loss (or muscle mass maintenance) tend to be small and highly variable. Occasionally, you'll find someone who loses 2-3 lbs more fat (and thus keeps 2-3 more pounds of muscle) on a cyclical ketogenic diet compared so something like the Isocaloric diet (moderate carb/moderate fat) but you can just as readily find folks who report the opposite: more muscle loss and less fat loss on the ketogenic compared to the carb-based diet. It could be genetic difference or something else causing the difference. As you'll learn in the chapters on partitioning, factors unrelated to diet or training control the majority of what you lose on a diet in the first place.

I want to mention that relatively fewer studies have been done comparing different sources of carbohydrates or fat. There are studies looking at the impact of sucrose (table sugar) vs. starch within the context of strictly controlled caloric intakes and they usually show no difference. That is, given an identical caloric intake, the source of the carbohydrates shows minimal differences. Similar studies have been done with dietary fat, typically showing similarly small differences. This is especially true when calories are restricted.

Unfortunately, overfeeding hasn't been examined in as great a detail in humans. There are studies comparing overfeeding of fat to carbohydrates (in the form of glucose, sucrose, or fructose) and, over the long-term gain in bodyfat are pretty much identical. The mechanism of the fat gain is different but, when the same number of calories are overfed, the same amount of fat is gained.

Studies looking at overfeeding of medium chain triglycerides (MCTs) or some newly developed dietary fats (diglycerols) also show some benefits in terms of decreased fat gain but the difference is typically small as well.

It's also conceivable that at the extremes of obesity, where all manners of metabolic problems are occurring, a difference might be seen for different macronutrient composition diets. Even there, studies where calories are rigorously controlled generally show little to no difference for varying macronutrient composition in terms of weight loss or body composition.

I should probably mention that, in studies of weight changes, there is quite frequently a large degree of variance in weight loss or weight gain given an identical number of calories. As it turns out, and as I'll discuss in the section on metabolic rate, this ends up being more an issue of individual metabolism and how it adapts than the diet itself. That is, some people's metabolic rate goes up (or down) more in response to over (or under) feeding. There is no evidence that the composition of the diet affects this to any significant degree; rather it's a genetically based metabolic effect.

To sum up this mini-section: for the most part, studies where protein is adequate (or at least close to it), varying carbs and fats within the context of an identical caloric intake tends to have a minimal overall effect. What effect is occasionally seen tends to be small and highly variable (some subjects do better with one diet than another but there's no consistent advantage). With the possible exception of extreme conditions (folks looking for super-leanness or folks who are super-obese), caloric intake is the greater determinant of results than the macronutrient composition.

Studies where calories are not rigorously controlled

As you might have guessed, these are generally the studies that the 'a calorie is NOT a calorie' folks refer to. In actuality, there are two different sets of studies in this group. The first is studies which are looking at nutrient intake on various diets. In such studies, subjects are simply given dietary guidelines (such as reduce fat to below 30% or reduce carbohydrates to 50 g/day or less) and intakes are examined.

Another data set of relevance to this discussion is studies comparing different diets (for example, recent studies have compared low-carbohydrate diets to the American Heart Association diet) under more real-world free-living conditions. Generally, in those studies, the subjects are given recommendations for the diet and let go. They typically report back to the researchers at some interval and frequently food intake is determined by means of self-reporting (which I've mentioned can be notoriously misleading). I want to look at each since both are illuminating to this discussion, as well as to how to choose a given diet.

The studies that look at average intakes given various recommendations are important because they often point to the real reason that a given diet works. For example, in studies where folks are told to reduce fat intake below 30% (or some other value), there is frequently an initial reduction in total caloric intake. That is, when they reduce dietary fat, their total energy intake generally goes down (at least initially). This is accompanied by weight loss. But this is not because of some magical effect of dietary fat, it's simply because they are eating less calories. Of course, longer term studies show that most people end up compensating, eating more of other foods, so the result is pretty short lived.

Studies of low-carbohydrate diets tend to show similar results. Tell folks to reduce (or even remove) all of the carbohydrates from their diet and they tend to eat less automatically without thinking about it. Usually a lot less. What typically happens in such studies is that folks keep their protein and fat intakes roughly the same. So, by removing a food category that might make up 50% or more of total calories, they can't help but eat less. Of course, this causes weight loss. But it's not because of the carbs (or lack thereof) per se; rather it's because they are eating less. There are other reasons, of course, such as decreased hunger (which not everyone experiences) and stable blood glucose that contribute to the reduction in calories but the removal of an entire food group is the main effect.

Tangentially, I should mention that many, many, many diet books rely on the rather simple prescription of 'reduce or remove food X' to lose weight. With X being something that contributes a lot of calories to the body, such as fat, sugars or highly refined carbohydrates. But while such diet books typically use all kinds of pseudo-physiology to explain the effect, it's really quite simple: if food X contributes a lot of calories to your diet and you remove food X, you'll eat less total calories and lose weight. No magic, simple caloric restriction.

So let's look at the second set of studies within the context. As I mentioned above, typically such studies look at the effect of different diets under free-living conditions. Similar to the results above, such studies frequently find that a given diet approach generates greater weight (or fat loss) but the effect is almost always due to differences in caloric intake. For example, a study comparing a low-fat (but calorie uncontrolled) diet to a higher fat (calorie uncontrolled) diet will frequently see more weight/fat loss in the low-fat trial because the subjects ate less calories. The same goes for other comparisons. And while a few studies have shown drastically differential effects (such as greater weight loss at higher caloric intakes for a given type of diet), the methodology leaves a good bit to be desired. As I mentioned above, most use self-reporting of food intakes which tend to be notoriously inaccurate.

I should mention that, very frequently, the variance in weight loss tends to be humungous, as do reported caloric intakes. What this would tend to suggest is that, sometimes a certain diet type will reduce (or increase) food intake and sometimes it won't. Individuals variance and food preferences can play a role as much as anything else.

Explaining the discrepancy

So now, perhaps, we have a little bit better handle on why two totally different arguments about whether or not 'a calorie is a calorie' can come out of the research. The problem is that, most commonly, folks are referring to different data sets in making their argument.

As mentioned in the first section, there's no doubt that studies comparing varying protein intakes almost always find better results with the higher protein intake. As you'll see next chapter, all of the diets described in this book are based on adequate protein intake so these studies, have no relevance here. From the standpoint of this book, the real debate comes out of studies which keep protein constant and vary carbohydrates and fat and there are two data sets in this regards.

On the one hand are the studies were calories are rigorously controlled, where the subjects are provided their daily food intake. In those studies, differences in weight loss or body composition changes tend to be small and highly variable (some people do slightly better on one diet versus another but there's no consistent pattern). This is the pattern I've observed in the real-world as well: some people do report slightly better results on one diet versus another but there's no consistent superiority of a given approach.

On the other hand are studies examining spontaneous food intakes on various diets, typically examining a single diet such as low-fat or low-carbohydrate. Such studies frequently find that spontaneous food intake goes down or up given certain macronutrient intakes. For example, when fat intake is reduced below a certain point, caloric intake frequently goes down. The same occurs when carbohydrate intake goes below a certain point. Diets high in both fat (40% of total calories) and carbs frequently show higher spontaneous caloric intakes.

There is also a set of studies looking at changes comparing different diets to one another, using self-reported intakes to estimate caloric intake. While such studies frequently show differences in terms of weight loss, it's generally related to caloric intake: if a given diet causes people to reduce calories more than another (through whatever mechanism), those people lose weight.

Is a calorie a calorie?

So is a calorie a calorie? Yes and no. Based on the data, my general feeling is this:

1. A sufficient protein intake will always beat out an insufficient protein intake, no matter what you do. Since all of the diets described in this book are based around sufficient protein, this is a non-issue.
2. Assuming caloric intake can be controlled (and protein is adequate of course), shuffling of carbs and fats tends to have a minor, approaching negligible effect.
3. There might be exceptions at the extremes (folks going to single digit bodyfat or extreme obesity) but that doesn't apply to the majority of folks.

In this respect, given adequate protein, it seems to matter very little what diet is chosen. From a weight or bodyfat standpoint, high carb should be as good as low-carb. Right? Well, no. The problem is that there's a HUGE assumption built into statement #2 above: that calories can be controlled under a given set of conditions. As has been found repeatedly in the real-world, this simply isn't a safe assumption.

Put a little bit differently, it might very well be possible to lose all the weight/fat you wanted on a calorie controlled junk-food diet with some high quality protein source. The problem that would probably arise is that most people wouldn't be able to control their hunger or appetite on such a diet and they'd probably end up eating more in the long run. In eating more, they'd either lose less weight/fat or even gain it. Even if a given dietary approach appears optimal for some reason, if you can't control your caloric intake, and end up eating more because of it, it won't produce results.

Meaning this: you'll frequently see folks make comparisons along the lines of 'well, it's easier to eat 300 calories from food X than from food Y, therefore a calorie isn't a calorie'. They may be generally correct but this criticism is tangential to the main issue. This is why I divided the data sets into studies where calories are controlled (usually in a highly artificial fashion) and where they are not (having more real world application).

It's obviously easier to overconsume calories from jelly beans or candy than from vegetable just as it's easier to eat 3000 calories from butter than from celery (no human alive could eat enough celery to get 3000 digestible calories). That matters hugely under conditions where folks are allowed to eat whatever they want. Quite in fact, many many diets are based around this simple fact: make people eat less of the foods that are easy to overconsume and/or make them eat lots of those foods that are tough to overeat and they will lose weight because they automatically reduce their caloric intake. I'll discuss that topic more in the next chapter.

But that only applies to the situation where calories aren't being monitored. When calories are being controlled rigidly, the source of calories (whether you're comparing carbs to fat, or even different sources of carbs and fat) matters to a much smaller degree.

Once again, my point is that if calories are being strictly controlled, the source doesn't appear to make a humungous difference in terms of body composition changes. As well, once you get protein intake to proper levels, fooling around with carbohydrate and fat ratios (within the context of identical caloric intakes) don't seem to make a huge amount of difference either. The bottom line still comes down to calories in versus calories out; it's simply that it may be easier to affect calories in (food intake) or calories out (through activity) with different macronutrient breakdowns.

As well, the source of calories can affect other aspects of physiology beyond body composition. Health, energy levels, hunger/appetite and all the rest interact here. So while a calorie controlled diet of jelly beans, butter and protein powder might very well work to lose weight/fat, it probably wouldn't be as healthy compared to a diet of low GI carbohydrates, healthier oils and lean protein sources.

Understand me here? Issues such as hunger control, long-term adherence, individual variance, athletic performance, and a few others all go into the determination of what food might or might not be a better choice under a given set of circumstances. So while a calorie might be more or less a calorie under somewhat artificial conditions (where calories are or can be strictly controlled), it's a little more complex than that in the real world. Other issues interact. The next few chapters will address those other issues.

Lyle McDonald is a prolific writer who has been featured in many major publications. He has a B.S. in Kinesiology from the University of California at Los Angeles. He is considered by many to be the leading authority on low-carb diets. To learn more about his book, The Ketogenic Diet: A Complete Guide for the Dieter and Practitioner.

7. Health News

Selenium May Protect Against Prostate Cancer

A team of researchers from Harvard Medical school analyzed data from 1163 men who had participated in the Physician's Health Study. Before starting the study, the participants had been cancer-free and had their blood tested for selenium. Initial selenium levels of 586 men who later developed prostate cancer were compared with the initial selenium level of 577 men who did not develop the disease. The researchers found that men with higher selenium levels were less likely to develop prostate cancer. Ongoing randomized trials of selenium supplementation may help to further evaluate its role in prostate cancer risk.

Fiber intake is associated with heart disease risk

A high intake of dietary fiber may decrease the risk of developing cardiovascular disease. Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 1999-2000 was used to examine the association between dietary fiber intake and serum concentration of C-reactive protein (CRP) in 3,920 adults. An elevated level of this protein in the blood indicates inflammation and can be predictive of coronary artery disease and heart attack. The participants with the highest intakes of dietary fiber had the lowest levels of CRP in their blood, even after adjusting for age, gender, race, education, physical activity, BMI, and total fat and calorie intake. Excluding participants with cardiovascular conditions, diabetes, or cancer did not alter the results. Fiber intake is independently associated with serum CRP concentration, supporting the recommendation of a diet with a high fiber content.

Soy may reduce the risk of endometrial cancer

Regular consumption of soy foods may reduce a woman's risk of getting cancer of the endometrium (the lining of the uterus), according to a study published in the May 29, 2004 issue of the British Medical Journal. The dietary habits of 1,678 women in China, 832 diagnosed with endometrial cancer and 846 healthy women, were tracked from 1997 to 2001. Food frequency questionnaires were used to measure the consumption of soy. The researchers found that women who had the highest intake of soy (either as soy protein or soy isoflavones), significantly reduced their risk for endometrial cancer. The reduction was more pronounced among women with high body mass index or waist: hip ratio.

Vitamin supplements lower diabetic retinopathy risk

Diabetic retinopathy is a leading cause of blindness. It occurs when diabetes damages the tiny blood vessels inside the retina, the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye.

A new study published in the May 2004 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition reports an association between the use of vitamin C and E supplements and a reduced risk of diabetic retinopathy.

The study examined data from 1,353 subjects with type 2 diabetes diagnosed from 1993 to 1995. The data revealed no association of retinopathy with vitamins C and E from food alone, but a decreased risk was found among those who reported long-term (> 3 years) use of vitamin C, vitamin E or multi-nutrient supplements. Compared to those who did not report supplement use, long-term supplement users experienced a two-fold reduction in the risk of developing diabetic retinopathy.

Although there is evidence from in vitro, animal, and short-term research, this was the first epidemiologic study on retinopathy to show the protective effect associated with vitamin C and vitamin E in supplement form.

Company Team Reaches Top of World on May 15, 2004

It is on May 15 2004 at 11:08 pm (EST) (or May 16 at 8:35 am Nepal time) that the Everest Team has planted the company flag on top of the highest peak in the world. The climbing team, Mario Dutil, Maxime Jean et Claude St- Hilaire, was able to ascend on its first attempt with an ideal temperature: - 26º C (-15 F), no wind or clouds and a perfect visibility. At base camp, on the radio, the support staff heard: "... base camp, SUMMIT SUMMIT SUMMIT!! Me, Mario and Maxime are on top of Everest, over." (Learn More...)

High Homocysteine and Bone Fracture Risk

Homocysteine is an amino acid that occurs naturally in the body. High levels are considered a risk factor for coronary artery disease. New evidence suggests that homocysteine may also be a marker for bone fracture risk. Several studies published in the May 13 issue of The New England Journal of Medicine support a strong association between high homocysteine levels and bone fracture risk in the elderly. The studies, conducted in the U.S. and Netherlands, compared data from thousands of people aged 55 and older. The researchers found that when compared to people with the lowest homocysteine levels, men with the highest homocysteine levels had a fourfold increase in the risk of bone fracture, and women with the highest homocysteine levels doubled their risk of bone fracture. Although not conclusive, it appears that homocysteine may cause bone loss by interfering with new bone formation. While experts continue to study the effects of homocysteine, one point is clear: a diet containing a generous amount of folic acid, B vitamins, vitamin D, and calcium, combined with regular exercise, is essential to help reduce your risk of bone fracture.

Antioxidants and Asthma Prevalence

A recent study published in the February 2004 issue of the American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine found that children who are exposed to improved levels of dietary antioxidants such as beta-carotene, vitamin C, and selenium, have a lower risk of developing asthma later in life. Researchers from Cornell University analyzed the nutritional data of over 7,500 youth (4-16 years old) obtained from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Results show that children with a greater dietary intake of beta-carotene had a 10% reduction in asthma risk, and children with a greater dietary intake of selenium were 20% less likely to develop asthma. Among children exposed to second-hand smoke, the risk reduction for beta-carotene and selenium was 40% and 50%, respectively. Higher doses of vitamin C showed similar results.

Dietary calcium and fracture risk

A study published in the September 17, 2003 edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reports that forearm fractures are on the rise among both adolescent boys and girls. While experts believe that most forearm fractures occurring in adolescence are related to the fact that bones become more porous during growth spurts, the 42 percent increase documented during this study raises concerns about whether bone-mass development in today's children may be impaired by lifestyle and dietary factors such as increased soft drink consumption, decreased milk consumption, or changing patterns of physical activity. The researchers theorize that increasing rates of forearm fractures in children could mean a dramatic increase in the risk for hip fractures and other more serious fractures when children become older adults. Adequate bone-mass development during childhood is critical to preventing osteoporosis and the related bone fractures that can occur later in life.

A Note on Pharmaceutical Grade Supplementation

It seems every day a news headline flashes by and demonstrates how powerful antioxidants are for general health. Unfortunately, most people are not well-educated regarding the benefits of multi-vitamins and therefore "settle" for far less than what their body deserves. Research is typically performed in a quality environment where the ingredients tested are high potency: when the research reports a specific amount, you can be certain that is well within the range of what was indicated. Are supplements that you take off a supermarket shelf subject to the same standard of quality? The answer is NO! The supplement industry is only loosely regulated, and many manufacturers choose to avoid quality control processes. Some use their own, proprietary techniques that are not verified by third parties. Often when they embrace what is known as Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP), they adhere to the "food" standard, which is far less demanding than the "pharmaceutical" standard. You can read more about these standards by visiting Current Good Manufacturing Practics and USP.org.

There is a great guide to multivitamins called the Comparative Guide to Nutritional Supplements by Lyle MacWilliams, B.Sc., M.Sc., FP. Lyle is a former Canadian Member of Parliament and Member of the Legislative Assembly for British Columbia. His book not only introduces the importance of antioxidants, but has several chapters explaining how they impact health. It covers the research behind vitamins and minerals. Most importantly, Lyle pulled together a panel of leading nutritionists (all doctors) to find the recommended levels for optimal health. This was called the "Blended Standard" and over 1000 multi-vitamins were compared against the standard. Only 500 made the cut, and of these, only 5 ranked in the 90th percentile or higher! Lyle published the scores for these top 500 in his book.

If your vitamin scored in the top 10%, that is fantastic! Congratulations for taking steps to protect your health - the monthly investment in a pharmaceutical-grade multivitamin is, in my opinion, a true health insurance policy. If your multivitamin is not superior quality, or if you are not currently taking a multi-vitamin, then I encourage you to read this to appreciate the value of the multivitamins that I sell (it took me four years to find a company with this level of quality and integrity), and then contact me or call toll-free 1-888-472-2829 to place your order and get started right away! Your health is precious, and I would not ask you to invest in something so important without offering the opportunity risk-free. Our products adhere to pharmaceutical-grade GMP, come with a potency guarantee that what is on the label is in the bottle, and are backed by a 100% 30-day money-back guarantee.

8. Ending Procrastination (by Jim Rohn)

Perseverance is about as important to achievement as gasoline is to driving a car. Sure, there will be times when you feel like you're spinning your wheels, but you'll always get out of the rut with genuine perseverance. Without it, you won't even be able to start your engine.

The opposite of perseverance is procrastination. Perseverance means you never quit. Procrastination usually means you never get started, although the inability to finish something is also a form of procrastination.

Ask people why they procrastinate and you'll often hear something like this, I'm a perfectionist. Everything has to be just right before I can get down to work. No distractions, not too much noise, no telephone calls interrupting me, and of course I have to be feeling well physically, too. I can't work when I have a headache." The other end of procrastination - being unable to finish - also has a perfectionist explanation: "I'm just never satisfied. I'm my own harshest critic. If all the i's aren't dotted and all the t's aren't crossed, I just can't consider that I'm done. That's just the way I am, and I'll probably never change."

Do you see what's going on here? A fault is being turned into a virtue. The perfectionist is saying that his standards are just too high for this world. This fault-into-virtue syndrome is a common defense when people are called upon to discuss their weaknesses, but in the end it's just a very pious kind of excuse making. It certainly doesn't have anything to do with what's really behind procrastination.

Remember, the basis of procrastination could be fear of failure. That's what perfectionism really is, once you take a hard look at it. What's the difference whether you're afraid of being less than perfect or afraid of anything else? You're still paralyzed by fear. What's the difference whether you never start or never finish? You're still stuck. You're still going nowhere. You're still overwhelmed by whatever task is before you. You´re still allowing yourself to be dominated by a negative vision of the future in which you see yourself being criticized, laughed at, punished, or ridden out of town on a rail. Of course, this negative vision of the future is really a mechanism that allows you to do nothing. It's a very convenient mental tool.

I'm going to tell you how to overcome procrastination. I'm going to show you how to turn procrastination into perseverance, and if you do what I suggest, the process will be virtually painless. It involves using two very powerful principles that foster productivity and perseverance instead of passivity and procrastination.

The first principle is: break it down.

No matter what you're trying to accomplish, whether it's writing a book, climbing a mountain, or painting a house the key to achievement is your ability to break down the task into manageable pieces and knock them off one at one time. Focus on accomplishing what's right in front of you at this moment. Ignore what's off in the distance someplace. Substitute real-time positive thinking for negative future visualization. That's the first all- important technique for bringing an end to procrastination.

Suppose I were to ask you if you could write a four hundred-page novel. If you're like most people, that would sound like an impossible task. But suppose I ask you a different question. Suppose I ask if you can write a page and a quarter a day for one year. Do you think you could do it? Now the task is starting to seem more manageable. We're breaking down the four-hundred-page book into bite-size pieces. Even so, I suspect many people would still find the prospect intimidating. Do you know why? Writing a page and a quarter may not seem so bad, but you're being asked to look ahead one whole year. When people start to do look that far ahead, many of them automatically go into a negative mode. So let me formulate the idea of writing a book in yet another way. Let me break it down even more.

Suppose I was to ask you: can you fill up a page and a quarter with words-not for a year, not for a month, not even for a week, but just today? Don't look any further ahead than that. I believe most people would confidently declare that they could accomplish that. Of course, these would be the same people who feel totally incapable of writing a whole book.

If I said the same thing to those people tomorrow - if I told them, I don't want you to look back, and I don't want you to look ahead, I just want you to fill up a page and a quarter this very day - do you think they could do it?

One day at a time. We've all heard that phrase. That's what we're doing here. We're breaking down the time required for a major task into one-day segments, and we're breaking down the work involved in writing a four hundred-page book into page-and-a-quarter increments.

Keep this up for one year, and you'll write the book. Discipline yourself to look neither forward nor backward, and you can accomplish things you never thought you could possibly do. And it all begins with those three words: break it down.

My second technique for defeating procrastination is also only three words long. The three words are: write it down. We know how important writing is to goal setting. The writing you'll do for beating procrastination is very similar. Instead of focusing on the future, however, you're now going to be writing about the present just as you experience it every day. Instead of describing the things you want to do or the places you want to go, you're going to describe what you actually do with your time, and you're going to keep a written record of the places you actually go.

In other words, you're going to keep a diary of your activities. And you're going to be surprised by the distractions, detours, and downright wastes of time you engage in during the course of a day. All of these get in the way of achieving your goals. For many people, it's almost like they planned it that way, and maybe at some unconscious level they did. The great thing about keeping a time diary is that it brings all this out in the open. It forces you to see what you're actually doing... and what you're not doing.

The time diary doesn't have to be anything elaborate. Just buy a little spiral notebook that you can easily carry in your pocket. When you go to lunch, when you drive across town, when you go to the dry cleaners, when you spend some time shooting the breeze at the copying machine, make a quick note of the time you began the activity and the time it ends. Try to make this notation as soon as possible; if it's inconvenient to do it immediately, you can do it later. But you should make an entry in your time diary at least once every thirty minutes, and you should keep this up for at least a week.

Break it down. Write it down. These two techniques are very straightforward. But don't let that fool you: these are powerful and effective productivity techniques that allow you put an end to procrastination and help you get started to achieving your goals.

To Your Success,

Jim Rohn

This article was submitted by Jim Rohn, America's Foremost Business Philosopher. To subscribe to the Free Jim Rohn Weekly E-zine go to www.jimrohn.com.

Copyright © Jim Rohn International. All rights reserved worldwide.

9. Business Development: The Power of Power Investing

An Excerpt from Rich Dad's Newest Book

Rich Dad's Who Took My Money?

By Robert Kiyosaki

CHAPTER 11: THE POWER OF POWER INVESTING

“What is power investing?” I asked rich dad.

“It is investing using all three asset classes, reinvesting cash flow, leveraged with OPM, other people’s money, and accelerated by tax incentives,” said rich dad.

“Sounds difficult.” I replied.

“That’s why so few investors use it and that is why so few investors achieve accelerated returns on their money.”

THE THREE ASSET CLASSES

As stated previously, the three major asset classes are:

Business

Real Estate

Paper Assets

One of the reasons so many people achieve poor investment results is simply because most people invest in only one asset class. Power investing requires that the investor invest in two preferably three, asset classes.

In the world today, other than a personal residence or a vacation home, most people invest primarily in paper assets such as stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or cash in certificates of deposit. Why? Again the answer goes back to the word easy . Paper assets are popular because they are easy to get into and easy to get out of. Also when compared to business or real estate investments, paper assets require very little management skills on the part of the investor.

A LOSS OF CONTROL

When you drive a car, a car has a gas pedal, brakes, and a steering wheel to give the driver control. Investing in paper assets, the investor often gives up controls over the investment and often turns control over to total strangers they hope are better drivers than they are. Giving up control is very risky, yet it is often best they give up control if they do not know how to drive.

For a professional investor, a major drawback of paper assets is that the investor, by not being active in management, gives up business control over the asset. For example, as a minor shareholder of Microsoft, it would be difficult for me to call Bill Gates up and tell him he is spending too much money or that I want a greater return on my investment. In my own businesses and in my real estate holdings, I can do that. I have control over how much money I can make, my expenses, taxes, and what to do with my earnings. I also have better control over less than honest activities that may be going on in the business. Another control given up with paper assets is that the investor has very limited tax advantages, if any. One of the best reasons to own a business or invest in real estate is because the tax department loves you.

In my opinion, a business and real estate are far better investments for people with the skills to manage them. Without management skills, control is again difficult. Obviously, if a person lacks the skills to manage a business or real estate, these two investment classes can be nightmares. Again, if you cannot drive, and do not know how to coordinate the gas, the brakes, and steering wheel of a car, driving a car can be dangerous to your health.

If businesses and real estate have far more advantages, why then do so many more people invest in paper assets and give up so much control? In my opinion, the answer is again found in the word easy . For millions of people, it is easier to turn over control of their money than to learn how to drive their money. That is why millions of investors have their portfolios filled with mutual funds without any idea on who is driving the fund. For many busy people, investing in mutual funds is easier so they can keep working hard rather than to financially learn how to drive. For many people mutual funds are the meat and potatoes of their financial life.

Shopping for mutual funds is like going to the frozen dinner section of the supermarket. It’s all prepared, prepackaged, and ready to go. All you have to do is pick up the dinner of your choice, pay for it, take it home, then heat and serve. While I do invest in stocks and mutual funds…I use them as dessert, not the main course. When I decide to use a paper asset, it is often because I need to get my money in and get my money out, quickly. I like paper assets primarily for their liquidity , as it is called, more than their long-term value.

The big disadvantage of real estate or a business is that the ins and outs are often very sticky, tedious, complicated and involved. That is why I invest in them for their long-term value.

BUYING STOCKS IS LIKE DATING

Rich dad used to say, “Buying stocks is like dating. You go to a dinner and a movie, and if you do not get along, you shake hands at the door and you don’t go out again. Buying real estate is like getting married. Before getting married, first there is generally a lot of dating…personally looking at as many properties as possible. Then after you find the property of your dreams, there is a big wedding ceremony at the bank, and then you settle down and see what happens. If you and your property do not get along, and the marriage becomes a nightmare, getting divorced, can be a tedious and stressful transaction.” When it comes to a business, rich dad said, “Building or owning a business is by far, the most rewarding but also the most stressful of all the three assets. If investing in paper assets is like dating, and acquiring real estate is like getting married, then investing in a business is like being married with kids.”

SEE THE WORLD THROUGH THE EYES OF A BUSINESS OWNER

When I returned from Vietnam in 1973, rich dad insisted I learn how to sell, to build businesses and learn to invest in real estate. He said, “If you want to be rich and be a great investor, you need to see the world through the eyes of a business owner and an investor, not a worker that works for a business.”

Not really understanding what he meant I asked, “If I am investing in real estate, why would I need to see that investment through the eyes of a business owner?”

Smiling, he took out his legal tablet and drew a rectangle, he said, “A farmer may be willing to pay $10,000 for this piece of land. If he pays more than that, his business will suffer because his vegetable business is not profitable enough to buy the land. In other words, if the farmer pays more than $10,000 for the land, the land may be more valuable than the business and the farmer’s business could not afford to pay for the land.”

“But a real estate developer could afford to pay more for the same piece of land.” I said, understanding where rich dad was going with this lesson. “Real estate is only as valuable as the business.”

Nodding rich dad continued with the lesson. “A real estate developer may be willing to pay $100,000 for the same piece of land that the farmer was only willing to pay $10,000 for. The land is more valuable because the business the developer is in is more profitable. The developer sees the same piece of real estate through a different set of eyes.”

Marcel Proust, author and poet, said:

“The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes.”

MISSED OPPORTUNITIES

In an earlier chapter, I wrote about driving through the streets of Cape Town and having my host say that it was impossible to make money in real estate in that town, at least the ways I described in my books. One reason why he and I did not see the same opportunities is because we do not see the same real estate through the same set of eyes.

BLIND TO OPPORTUNITIES

During the 1960s and 1970s, my rich dad could see the changes coming to the sleepy tropical islands of Hawaii. He knew he had to make his move or be left behind. My poor dad only saw that the price of his house was going up.

For years, Hawaii had been just a dream for many people. Traveling to Hawaii was only for the rich and travel was primarily by ships. It took 5 to 6 days to sail from California to Hawaii. Many people did not have the money or the time to afford two weeks of travel, round trip. Rich dad saw the advent of jet travel bringing millions of tourists to Hawaii, making Hawaii not only closer but more affordable. He knew the new passenger jets would change everything.

Just as the farmer saw the land valued at $10,000 and the developer saw it worth $100,000, my poor dad saw the changes through the eyes of a school teacher and my rich dad saw the changes through the eyes of a businessman and an investor…a different set of eyes.

Ironically, during the 1960s and the 1970s, my poor dad earned more money than my rich dad. My poor dad a high paying government job and earned more money than my rich dad. During the 1960’s my rich dad was chronically short of cash. Every spare dollar went back into building his business and buying as much real estate as he could. My rich dad did not have a steady paycheck and there were many times he had no money at all, yet he kept going.

During this period, my poor dad was actually in a better position to afford the investments my rich dad was buying. Having a high paying job, my poor dad would have had an easier time getting the bank to give him a loan to buy the properties, before they skyrocketed in value. My rich dad had to go from banker to banker, investor to investor, to find the money. It was hard to get people to trust him because he did not have much money and he did not have a normal steady job.

Although my poor dad was in a better position to get rich, during this era, he didn’t. Instead he worked hard, stayed busy, played it safe, bought a house, saved money, and was excited that the equity in his home was going up, as real estate values began to climb. Then suddenly, in 1967, it was rich dad who seemed to come out of nowhere when he purchased a major hotel on Waikiki Beach. All my poor dad said was, “How can he afford a hotel on Waikiki Beach? He doesn’t even have a real job?”

For MORE, read the newest book in the Rich Dad series: Rich Dad’s Who Took My Money? available on www.richdad.com.

10. Closing Thoughts

Well, here I am - beautiful Lead, South Dakota. Still getting settled - in fact, the moving truck is supposed to arrive the day that this edition goes out. However, I am excited to have been able to finish this issue and get it out to you on time. It is my hope that you found this newsletter to be informative, and that you will let me know your thoughts on how I might improve it in the future. Best of health and success to you! Jeremy.

11. Subscription Information

For more information:	Natural Physiques™
Subscribe:	natphys-news@aweber.com
Unsubscribe:	weightlossexpert@bodybuilders.com
List owner:	Jeremy Likness