So is sugar a poison?

Are we poisoning ourselves and our kids with too much sugar?  First, let's talk about what sugar really is.  All sugars are carbohydrates.  Carbohydrates are chains of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.  The can vary from complex starchy carb chains, like those found in sweet potatoes or simple "sugar" carb chains like those found in fruits.  Glucose is the simplest form of "sugar" that our body can use as fuel. 

When we digest carbs, the ultimate goal is to break them down to a usable form of energy, which is glucose.  Our brain can only use glucose for fuel, thank goodness because the brain is primarily comprised of fat!  The brain can also use ketones, which are byproducts of fat metabolism when we consume little to no carbs.  Our kidneys are another organ that uses glucose as its primary fuel source.  So the brain has to have glucose.  No glucose means poor brain function which can range from poor memory to more serious conditions like Alzheimer's, Depression and Bi-polar disorder.

The brain uses about 4-6 grams of glucose per hour and the kidneys, significantly less, about 1 gram.   If we do the math, this means our body only needs about 150 grams of carbs, or less, per day.  Anything over that, and we are driving insulin up unnecessarily high, unless we are trying to gain weight.  Remember, we have to have insulin but if we are not replenishing depleted glycogen stores, insulin drives glucose into the liver where it is converted to and stored as fat.  If that isn't bad enough, when our insulin is high our brain is competing with it for glucose.  And guess what?? If your brain isn't getting enough glucose, you know what it tells you to eat? That's right, more carbs...and before you know it, you are caught in a negative feedback loop that makes you crave carbs, diminishes cognitive function (stupid), store fat and develop insulin resistance (type-2 diabetes.)

Interestingly enough, our body has redundant systems to make sure our brain gets its glucose if we don't consume enough carbs.  The body can do this by breaking down protein and fat.   That's why there are essential fatty acids and amino acids...there are no essential carbohydrates.  Simply put, we, as humans, are designed to function and be very healthy on a low carb intake, which makes sense since large amounts of carbs are relatively new to our diet.  Nowadays, we are flooded with carbs everywhere we look and are told that we should have 6-11 servings per day!!!  As usual, I am digressing...back to sugar.

There are several types of sugar.  Here are four of the most common:

• sucrose (table sugar) a disaccharide made of one glucose and one fructose
• lactose (milk sugar) a disaccharide made of glucose and galactose
• galactose a monosaccharide found in animal products
• fructose (fruit sugar) found in...duh...fruit and is the sweetest of all the sugars

The two that we are going to talk about are the most commonly found: Sucrose and Fructose.

Here is the issue.  Glucose is a primary metabolic fuel for the body...especially the brain.  If the brain can't get enough glucose, the body uses fats and proteins as fuel or the brain tells the body to eat more carbs.  Remember if insulin, a fat storage hormone, is high, our body loses the ability to metabolize protein and stored fat and our brain suffers.  The message is simple; reduce the insulin load by reducing the carb load. 

Over the history of our existence, our bodies have learned to metabolize glucose very efficiently in the liver.  Now enter fructose.  Even though fructose is classified as a sugar it is metabolized completely different than glucose.  Once consumed, fructose is not allowed to enter the bloodstream and is absorbed and metabolized solely by the liver.  What other substances are not allowed into the bloodstream and metabolized solely by the liver?  Yep, toxins.  Hmmmm...

When fructose, which is very sweet, enters the body we begin to produce a hormone called ghrelin which stimulates hunger.  This makes sense, when we taste or smell something good; nature has programmed us to eat.  Ghrelin levels are reduced when insulin goes up.  What releases insulin?  Elevated blood sugar.  This also makes sense because if our blood sugar is going up that means we are getting carbs and have probably had enough to eat.

Here is the problem.  When we consume fructose, our body can't use it, like other toxins, and the liver has to do something with it.  So what it does is actually pull more glucose out of the blood into the liver and begins breaking down fructose.  The end result is the liver turning fructose into fatty acids, some of which make it to the blood as triglycerides, and the others as fat deposits in the liver. 

So short version: fructose pulls more glucose into the liver, which reduces the ghrelin/hunger response, which signals a person to keep eating, which raises insulin, which prevents the brain from getting what it wants, and increases fat storage and fat deposits on the liver...also called fatty liver disease...which is common in alcoholics…and we eventually become sick and obese.  So fructose, in many ways, is metabolized like alcohol and other toxins and causes some serious health problems.

Some sources of fructose are:

• fruit, which when eaten in its natural state contain fiber which diminishes fructose absorption
• table sugar-sucrose (50% glucose and 50% fructose)
• High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) (55% or more fructose, the rest glucose)...the worst of all.  Sweeter than sugar, cheaper to make, and found in just about everything processed, sold in a box, sodas and....drum roll...kids juices and snacks. 

It is a genius marketing idea to put HFCS if everything because it is sweet, causing a ghrelin response (hunger), and lowers glucose so certain industries can make claims that is lower on the glycemic index, thus furthering our "carb craving" so we have to eat even more...pretty smart.  Too bad it is hepatoxic and makes us fat and stupid not to mention increase diabetes and cardio-vascular disease. 

Thanks to the soda companies, HFCS climbed from 3 million tons to 8 million tons in 1980.  According to the Center of Disease Control, it was about this time that obesity and even type-II diabetes began to increase in not only adults but children as well...and continues to rise.

It is easy to now see how high levels of sugar and HFCS can cause a long list of health problems including behavioral and mood disorders.  Check out these stats from the Center of Disease Control on ADHD and its rise in America.  Hmmm...more disease=more medications=more $$ for drug companies.  Also, don't know about you, but I see a correlation here...increase in carbs=increase in ADHD and related illnesses.  If you ever google "ADHD diet" you will find a long list of recommendations that look almost identical to Paleo Diet....coincidence? 

One of the theories about fructose consumption dates back to the evolution of humans.  For the majority of our existence, carbs were very scarce and often available on a seasonal basis.  Fruit is the primary source of fructose. Fruits are usually ripe and in season in the fall.  The large amount in fructose in fruits drive hunger and allow us to gorge on carbs and to build an extra layer of fat which allows to survive the winter more easily.  The point is we are designed to be very healthy with low carbs and occasionally gorge on carbs...unfortunely most folks get caught in the latter.

Ever heard that sugar is addicting?  Well, it’s true.  Sugar meets all the criteria as addictive drugs...except its legal, cheap and everywhere.  Here are the criteria for addicting substances:

• Tolerance is developed
• Withdrawal
• Persistant desire
• Negative consequences 

Another problem with sugar is that it accelerates the production of AGE's (advanced glycation end products.)  These are harmful products from metabolizing glucose that oxidize (this is bad) and increase free radicals which damages our cells.  We need anti-oxidants to combat free radicals.  Fruits, especially berries, contain anti-oxidants.  Interesting how nature already firgued this out and put fiber and anti-oxidants with sources of fructose and sugar.  Its only when remove sugar from its natural state that we exponetially increase its harmful effects. 

Here is a great article that Gary Taubes, author of Why We Get Fat recently wrote for the New York Times.  In it, he writes about the history of HFCS in the American Diet and the associated rise in diseases and provides some compelling evidence. 

If you have kids, this video is a must see.  It is a lecture given by Dr. Robert Lustig.  The video is a little over an hour long…I know, I know that’s pretty long, but he goes into the microbiology of fructose and shows how it is a toxin...and gives the simple version too.

This is the message guys.  Limit or restrict the use of sugar and fructose.  First start by identifying sources and cutting back on those sources and replace them with healthier choices, like healthy meats, fats or vegetables.  Fruits are not bad.  They contain fiber and nutrients, but since they contain fructose we should limit consumption to one to two servings per day.  If possible, replace sugar or other sweeteners with natural organic honey.  It may contain more calories per serving but it contains less fructose than table sugar.  And get rid of all those fruit drinks!! They are loaded with fructose.

Studies have shown that occasional exposure to certain toxins like alcohol and fructose can be very healthy for the liver and ensures that it maintains its effectiveness at removing "bad" stuff.  But, like all things, too much can be very harmful.  Don't panic.  This doesn't mean you can't have sugar again...because you can.  It just means, by educating yourself with some useful knowledge, you can make better decisions for not only yourself but for you family as well.  So, once again, if you don't take my word for it, please, seek out the knowledge and do your research...it can only help.

Physical fitness testing…what does it prove?

A wise person once asked me, “what are you training for? You gotta have a purpose.” At the time, I was doing two-a-days 5 or 6 times a week, clearly overtraining, and didn’t give the comment much thought. Well, after years of experience (a lot of it trial and error) and instructing others, primarily recruits and officers, I have come to the conclusion that physical fitness training must have a purpose.

In law enforcement, even combat, PT (physical training) has to be planned and structured to support and prepare a person for a specific job. For LEO’s, the job is defensive or control tactics. I have been in many debates and discussions regarding just how PT should be implemented for recruits. Over the years, I have been fortunate enough to be a part of some major changes and improvements in how PT is done regarding recruits and officers on my department. I have to say that these changes are a vast improvement over what it was. That does not mean that there isn’t room for improvement…because there is.

Lets take a look at traditional PT for recruits, both law enforcement and military alike. Traditional PT usually consists of run, run, run, push-ups, pull-ups and sit-ups. I will admit that this type of training can lead to certain improvements in one’s level of fitness and allow units or groups to form as a team. The reality is that this type of linear training separates fitness in way that nature or the real world has no regard for. In other words, if a person was in a fight or pursuit, they would not have the luxury of performing the “cardio” and “strength” component separately. They would have to perform them simultaneously. It is easy to see where traditional PT has its limitations. It is this logic that helped make fitness programs, like CrossFit, so popular among military and law enforcement. PT programs that integrate shorter bouts of varied movements under high intensity result in a more direct translation to increases in job related performance.

Lets take that a step further. Since some of these popular programs have hit the scene, many agencies and military groups have implemented this type of methodology with great success. Quite often, in many recruit training programs, recruits are initially exposed to group runs and general calisthenics. I admit that group runs are a useful tool in developing marching skills and building discipline as a team. After some time doing the “basics” for several weeks, recruits are exposed to high intensity, varied, interval type training and even some basic lifts. After several months of this, recruits are allowed to some strength training, perhaps on their own, with some occasional running and high intensity training sessions. Sound familiar? For those who have gone through recruit training on my department in the last four years, this should sound very familiar.

This type of program has proven to be very successful and far superior in means of improved performance over the traditional programs. I think it can be improved even more. We have to understand the scale of persistence of adaptation. This means the rate at which, once a physiological adaptation is achieved, how quickly it will diminish. For example, muscle tissue, once attained or developed stays with us a long time. It takes a while to get it but we keep it for a long time. Conversely, cardio-respiratory endurance, once attained, will diminish very quickly if not trained. But it doesn’t take very long to make improvements.

What does this mean? Stay with me on this…below is a scale showing, in order, those things that stay with us the longest to the least. This also means that the things that stay with us the longest take a while to develop.

1. Muscle growth
2. Strength
3. Power
4. Speed
5. Skill
6. Cardio-respiratory endurance

There may be some other categories but I think you get the idea. Now that we understand this, lets apply it.

Since muscle growth and strength stay with us the longest and take the most time to develop, then its clear that this should be the first couple months of any training plan. Now that we got some muscle and strength, not to mention stronger and more stable joints which prevent injuries, we can move into developing speed and skill with higher intensity, interval type training. During this phase, which we will call the conditioning phase, in order to maintain the muscle and strength we gained from the first block of training, we will still do some strength work but only occasionally.

Finally, we move to the last phase…the finishing phase. Having a basic understanding of physiology, we know that we can attain “cardio” pretty quickly but lose it equally as fast so we begin adding more of this to our training along with more frequent and technical bouts of defensive or control tactics training. By the time we have started this finishing phase, we have gained a lot of muscle, developed more stable joints (better preparing us for the more dynamic/explosive blocks of training) and have had substantial improvements in our cardio-respiratory endurance from doing high intensity/interval type training.

In the final phase, we are basically “fine tuning” our skills and endurance, peaking us for our “contest date” which is graduation. Additionally, during this final finishing phase, again to keep the gains we have made, we will still occasionally do some strength and conditioning work.

I know what you are thinking, “wow, that is genius! Why didn’t we do that?” I can’t take all the credit. The type of phased training that I described is nothing new. This is exactly how professional fighters or athletes train, but instead of graduation they are peaking for an actual contest or sporting event. Athletes in the off season do a lot of strength training for several months which allow the adaptations to take place. Then after that, they start conditioning…a mix of higher intensity type training with occasional strength work and the introduction of skill work. Then, as the contest or opening season date approaches, they enter a final phase of sport specific skill work with occasional strength and conditioning. They stay in this phase until the season is over or the fight is finished.

So what is the difference between recruit training and how a professional athlete trains? Ahhhh, enter the “argument”. I can only speculate as to why it is different. It shouldn’t be. Professional athletes have done this for decades and know it works. My guess is that at some point in the past someone made a decision, based on whatever available knowledge they had, and figured a whole lot of running, push-ups and sit-ups…maybe some strength near the end (which is backwards)…would best prepare someone for the “real-world.” Once that type of linear, physiologically backwards training was in place, it remained unchallenged because “that’s just the way we have always done it.”

Putting strength training in the last few weeks of any long term program doesn’t make any sense. First, it doesn’t allow any time to make substantial gains and by then, a person or recruit already has some type of joint related injury that they are nursing that could have been diminished or avoided if they had done some strength training earlier to make their joints more stable.

So how does all this relate to the title of this article, “Physical fitness testing…what does it prove?"  Well, now that we have a better understanding of types of recruit training it is easy to see that PT tests may seem a little silly. First let me start by saying that I understand and agree that there needs to be a measurable fitness standard that provides a means to track progress in a large group in a relatively easy manner. When we test someone on a run, push-ups and sit-ups we are only measuring their ability to perform those events, which is quite often an unreliable way to determine a persons performance in combat or a fight. Well nothing is perfect, and I think many departments are beginning to recognize this and incorporate more scenario based training and timed obstacle courses with job related tasks in to their testing process.

I think PT tests are a necessary tool in recruit or military training and need to stay in as part of any program. Nothing is perfect but if we can more closely emulate the demands that are faced on the job into the test, then the better we can evaluate performance. So, I guess, we can say that a PT test only proves how well a person can do those events in a test. Testing should be a part of the progress, but I feel that the PT program is truly where a person will receive their preparation. Law enforcement agencies and military alike have made huge improvements in physical training programs for recruit training. I think we can make it better.

On our department, recruit training lasts approximately 7 months. I think the first few weeks of physical training should be dedicated to traditional team building calisthenics with a few sessions dedicated to teaching mechanics on basic lifts….deadlift, back/front squat, power cleans, push press and bench. This allows the group to form as unit, develop protocol/discipline and acclimate to “academy” life. Then enter the strength phase, about 9-10 weeks. This would consist of 3-4 weekly sessions of strength with one or two sessions of group calisthenics. This allows recruits time to build muscle, strength and strong joints to withstand the increasingly demanding defensive/control tactics training while maintaining team discipline. Next, the conditioning phase with 2-3 sessions of high intensity, metcon type training with an occasional bout of group calisthenics and strength training. This phase will last for another 10 weeks or so. Then the finishing phase, which would be a lot of high intensity job related skill work, occasional metcon, occasional strength and occasional group calisthenics.

I think this model better prepares a recruit for not only the job but also to better withstand the rigors of recruit training. Is this going to happen? Who knows. Maybe one day. As we all know, new ideas, no matter how sound, are often met with resistance because they go “against the grain” and require a new understanding and way of doing things. Regardless of the outcome, I can confidently say that physical training in the military and law enforcement world is on the right track and has changed for the better in the last few years. We have to remember, the physical training must have a direct translation to job related performance and should be structured and planned with that in mind.

Here is an article written by Major Damon Wells, who occasionally writes for Mark Rippetoe’s website, startingstength.com. It disusses ideas on how PT can be better programmed for specific roles or duties.  Here is another article by Major Ryan Whittemore, who is also an author for Rippetoe's website.  This one goes into "worst case scenarios" and explains that its important to tailor the training for those types of situations.  Both article discuss similar issues and bring to light some obvious flaws and make very convincing arguments. 

Until next time, make sure to get some sprints or strength training in this week, and again please let me know if there are any topics you would like to see discussed or questions you may have. I will be having more lectures and seminars in the near future so keep your eyes open for times and dates.
　



References:
Berg, Jeremy and L. Stryer and J. Tymoczko. Biochemistry 6^th Edition. W.H. Freeman and Company.      2007

Federal Bureau of Investigation. Physical Fitness for Law Enforcement Officers. United States Department of Justice. March 1972

Jesse, John. Wrestling Physical Conditioning Encyclopedia. The Althetic Press. 1986

Rippetoe, Mark and Lon Kilgore. Practical Programming for Strength Training 2^nd Edition. The Aasgard Company. 2009

Thanks!

I just wanted to say thanks to everyone who made yesterday's class a success!

We covered topics ranging from paleo nutritio, cholesterol myths, disease prevention, endocrine system and exercise physiology.  I had a lot of great questions and feedback.

I will have more lectures and seminars so keep your eyes open for future announcements.

Keep spreading the word!