Mind Muscle with Simon de Veer
Mind Muscle with Simon de Veer
LA Life Quirks, Ozempic Muscle Myths, and PFAs in Your Bubbly
Ever felt like clean eating is the golden ticket to your dream body but still not seeing the results? We’re here to tell you why that might be happening and what you can do about it. We also tackle the hot topic of muscle loss linked to the weight-loss drug Ozempic and reveal some startling truths about PFAs in your favorite sparkling water. Tune in to hear a personal story of how a disrupted Sunday workout turned into a lesson in adaptability and resilience, teaching us all how to turn frustration into motivation.
Living in Los Angeles offers some quirky experiences, and we're sharing them all. From the odd reality of recognizing people from TV commercials to a canvasser’s Botox comment that left us laughing, we explore how life in LA can skew your perception of fame and familiarity. We'll also correct some common misconceptions about nutrition, emphasizing that a caloric deficit is key to weight loss—even if that means subsisting on Peeps (but please, don’t actually do that). Plus, a humorous take on an unfulfilled dream of becoming a Navy SEAL adds a personal touch to our discussion on LA culture.
Gradual, lasting changes are crucial for health and fitness, and we’ve got strategies to help you maintain those new habits. We discuss the importance of lean body mass and offer tips to minimize muscle loss if you're using weight-loss drugs like Ozempic. Concerned about PFAs? We break down their presence in consumer products, from sparkling water to seafood, and offer practical advice to reduce exposure. Whether it's the relationship between clean eating and caloric control, or making informed choices about what you consume, this episode is packed with actionable insights to support your health and fitness journey. Tune in and let’s keep lifting, learning, and growing together!
Producer: Thor Benander
Editor: Luke Morey
Intro Theme: Ajax Benander
Intro: Timothy Durant
For more, visit Simon at The Antagonist
Welcome to the Mind Muscle Podcast. Here's your host, simon DeVere, and welcome back to Mind Muscle, the place where we study the history, science and philosophy behind everything in health and fitness. Today, I am Simon DeVere and there's nothing new, except all that has been forgotten. All right, you know how it goes. Before we dive into it, I want to let you know what we're going to talk about today. So, yeah, guys, on the docket for today's episode, I want to talk about when your body isn't responding to clean eating. Sorry, I'm laughing and there's nothing funny, because this came from a comment that I overheard out there in the wild, if you will. So anyway, we'll get to the humor. I realized there was nothing funny even though I was laughing. Yeah, bad poker player show in my hand.
Speaker 1:I also want to talk about a story that I'm seeing more and more, and something that I'm seeing pop in conversations with this idea of muscle loss while using Ozempic. Let's take a look at that. And again, I'm seeing a lot of stories having a lot of conversations about this without showing our hand. Yet again, might be a little bit different. The truth might be different than what is currently being conveyed. And then, last one, that this was kind of a deep dive that one of my own clients got me into, but you guys have maybe seen the same thing floating around. There was a recent study about PFAs, let's try to say it, polyfluoroalkali substances. We're going to call them PFAs for the rest of the show. But yeah, there was a study about PFAs in sparkling water. I'm a sparkling water drinker, so are some of my clients, so I had to run this down for the benefit of, well, quite frankly, myself, but a lot of other folks too. So I just kind of wanted to dive into a study that you might or might not have seen that is making the rounds right now about, yeah, these forever plastics that might be in sparkling waters. But anyway, guys, before I dive into the stuff I have prepped, I just kind of wanted to actually come clean on one from the weekend.
Speaker 1:I was not the best version of myself and, yeah, normally on Sunday, sunday is my biggest training day. It's the only day of the week where I don't have a schedule that I need to adhere to. So I really look forward to it and I like to wake up, drink my coffee and take as long as I need to do my workout. It is the only day in the week where time restrictions are not the main driver of what I'm doing. I get real excited and protective of my Sunday morning. It's actually my daughter's birthday at the end of the month and one of her presents showed up a little bit early. So anyway, I had this big box. So the surprise was dead. My daughter was getting a giant trampoline for her birthday and, yeah, she could see it. So she had. She'd been asking me to put it together and clearly I hadn't.
Speaker 1:But yeah, when I woke up it was about like 530 on Sunday and I my daughter always comes out in the middle of my workout and I was just thinking to myself like, oh, how cool would it be if, when she comes out to see me this morning, if there's a big giant trampoline set up back here. So, anyway, aborted my normal Sunday mission. I normally would have been working out. Instead, I spent the morning assembling my daughter's trampoline and, yeah, it was all good, except she comes out, like I anticipated. And then eventually it kind of wound up turning into like a small community workout, and then it still was Sunday. So I tried to get my beautiful Sunday workout done, but there was a lot of people over at that point, a lot of kids jumping around, and it was literally almost comical because I think the only time people wanted to talk to me was when I was deadlifting. So it was like people would wait until I had the bar near my lockout and just ask me right then in that moment.
Speaker 1:So, anyway, I didn't vocalize this during the workout. I did almost immediately, privately to a friend. Yeah, in a way, this is kind of what kills me on group workouts why I'm so much of a solo artist is you bring so many people around and it just. I had a really bad workout, quite frankly. Um, I wasn't good at any of my lifts. It took way longer than it normally should have, and and I didn't do good at anything.
Speaker 1:So, anyway, come inside pissed off about the workout, and then I just quietly rant about it to a friend over text and I actually had a few hours to then sit there and think about it and I still was, admittedly, pissed about the workout. It will obviously be another week until I have a chance to atone for that, but no, as actually time went on, I did calm down a little bit and I was just reminding myself like it's okay to not have the perfect workout this Sunday and, admittedly, as you can tell, it really did bother me. It actually pissed me off. I'm not exaggerating and so one thing that I've actually found that I can use that anger that I feel for is to motivate for the next workout. So, younger version of me, I think, would have made time later that day to go back and make amends for it literally that day.
Speaker 1:But, as I complain, I really don't have loads of time available. So, like, doubling up on Sunday, the one day I don't have time restrictions, also didn't seem like a great plan. So, um, no, as weird as this sounds, I just used my anger. I wasn't going to lie and try to tell myself I'm not angry or this is okay, and bottle it up and everything's no, I'm actually just going to let it burn and I'm going to use it in the very next workout. Um, so that that that's something that I was able to kind of connect to later, but that I do more and more these days is, if something really does bother me, um, just throw it on the fire, use it as fuel for the next one.
Speaker 1:I didn't really need to atone for it that day and it was funny. And again, I'm not going to lie to you guys and say that I don't have emotions and I don't get irrational. I am a human being. I do this shit all the time and, yeah, maybe later I think differently on it. But no, I'm not going to. I need to respect my own emotions as much as I respect other people's emotions, quite frankly. So it's entirely okay for me to get angry because I don't like the way my workout went something productive, rather than let it kind of just consume me and piss me off all day and make me resent the people that came over and ruined my workout. It took me a minute to get there, but before the day was out actually before the morning was out I had actually kind of recalibrated and decided no, this was good. In my own workout logs, I keep seeing this note about some nagging joint injuries and things. So, yeah, even though I wanted to have a really, really good workout that day, I don't think it's just coping or rationalizing to point out that actually not going all out also had some benefits.
Speaker 1:Other thing I'll mention is so not only being honest, using my anger to motivate the next session, the other thing I focused on throughout the day was just being healthy, on all the other little things that are outside of my workout. Admittedly, something I've kind of caught onto myself is I lean a lot on movement, exercise, movement exercise and just going hard all the time, and so I actually know that if I just eat like I tell my clients to, that I don't need to train as hard as I normally do when I'm always moving. It covers a lot of the mistakes that I'm making on the nutrition side. And so, yeah, on even a Sunday, which I'm anticipating a really great workout if it doesn't connect for whatever reason, more and more I'm just reminding myself to one use that anger and motivation that you will feel to motivate the next workout, and then, while you're sitting there stewing about what you should do in the next workout, and then, while you're sitting there stewing about what you should do in the next workout, eat like an adult, do all the things that you tell everybody else to do all the time, and you'll actually be in a great spot for the next workout.
Speaker 1:So, anyway, yeah, just wanted to come clean. I actually wasn't proud of that. I really, really do try to stay present, particularly as it pertains to my family and that life outside of the gym. And, anyway, glad that I only shared this with a friend privately and that I didn't mention it to anybody who was there, because, yeah, I probably would have regretted it within a few minutes. And, yeah, the thing that was bothering me, even though it was bothering me for real and I really was angry about it, it's fine and I can use it to keep myself on track. So, anyway, just there. I'm not perfect, still struggling, trying to figure out work-life balance, whatever the hell that is. But yeah, anyway, just same thing for you guys. Life gets in the way of our best laid plans. Be flexible, take it in stride, roll with the punches. I'm trying to be better and better at that. I'm a little bit type A. I like to control, I like to program. So this is something that I'm probably saying out loud to help myself out more than you guys. So, anyway, guys, the stuff that I actually got saying out loud to help myself out more than you guys. So, anyway, guys, the stuff that I actually got prepped to talk about today.
Speaker 1:So a long time ago, in a blog that a lot of Angelenos read, called the LAist, they used to have this segment that was called Overheard in LA and they would just kind of people would send in just things that they had kind of heard people say, that were just very emblematic of this, the city that I live in. And you know, admittedly, I do feel like about Los Angeles as I do about members of my family. If I want to talk shit about Los Angeles or my friends that live here, do fair game, just like if I'm talking about someone in my family. But if you are from outside the family and you try bad mouthing, um, for a lot of reasons I'm not into it. One, all the stuff that people not from here say isn't relevant because they don't really know what they're talking about. It's based on, like stereotypes and things. And then same thing, just like when someone not in your family tries talking about your family, I just want to slap them. And so, yeah, we get a lot of LA hate. But no, I would rather us dish it out ourselves than hear it from people that are making their impressions of this city on their own poor screen habits. So, yeah, usually whatever critique they have of Los Angeles should actually be more directed at their own attention span. But anyway, fair game for me Some of the fun ones, just to run down kind of the flavor of what will be like an acceptable one.
Speaker 1:Oh, I love this one. There should be a word for that moment when you see someone in Los Angeles and you're not sure if you met them when you were drunk, worked with them or recognize them from a minor TV role. That one was a few years back, I don't remember exactly, but that one really tracks for me. My wife does commercial casting. I've looked over literally thousands of actors in my over a decade living here now and weird for me is that I actually think the non-famous actors that I've looked at their faces in grotesque detail on a casting link are actually the famous ones. And then I think actual famous people are just people that I know from around the way. So ironically, that's my whole flow around the city. I am very blunt and direct with the actual stars and I am very cautious and respectful of the people that I've seen on my commercial casting tape.
Speaker 1:Um, yeah, anyway, just weird, weird aspect of living here I think all the B and D list actors are the big deal, the A listers. I just assume that I already know them. Actually, another funny one was a canvasser says to this woman hey, you look like a good person. And she says, no, it's Botox, even like our weather fair game, bring a jacket. It's 10 below outside. No, it's not 10 below 70, um, but anyway, one of my clients actually called me out for one of these recently. Um, I was just telling him an awesome self-aggrandizing story about how I was going to go into the navy seals if I hadn't been cast on that show one tree hill. Um, true, by the way, but I'm not so self-obsessed that I don't get the comedy in somebody saying that out loud. But yeah, I really was getting recruited by the Seals when I wound up getting cast on that show, one Tree Hill. So I did abandon that dream and honestly not bragging, because that one actually still eats at me.
Speaker 1:I genuinely you know people have that that the one that got away in other aspects in their life, that's the one for me. I will still always wonder if I could have made it into the seals, and there's literally nothing anybody can say that will make me feel any kind of way about it. There's only one thing that would make me feel any kind of way about it, and that would be taking the test and passing it. So, yeah, I still do some things and I've talked to some folks. But that for me is the one that I probably won't. Maybe I don't know, maybe I'll let it go. But yeah, I would have liked that challenge and that test. Obviously I'm cocky enough to think I would have made it, but I really would have liked to have been pushed and seen how that played out. But yeah, no, going back in time, that one's done. But anyway, the one I heard.
Speaker 1:I'm at a relatively famous workout destination on the west side of Los Angeles. We're at the Santa Monica stairs. Two gentlemen walk past. One says to the other my body just isn't responding to clean eating. You know, this to me just seemed like a very LA conversation. And his buddy was a good friend. He offered absolutely no pushback on what the guy said, he just nodded, agreed, or, you know, as friends say, he just he engaged in polite conversation.
Speaker 1:Um, so I w I was laughing and I actually did flag it to my client right then. And there I was like wow, there are, you know, just ceaseless attempts to overthrow thermodynamics. Um, nutrition is a space people like to do it the most, and all attempts so far have failed. Um, I'm not gonna lie, my guy didn't quite get what I was talking about, and then I flagged the comment and pointed out that people just want a way out of calories in, calories out. It's not a theory of everything, but there are just so many ways that people try to nullify that. Oh, if you have this calorie, it doesn't count. Or if you plug your left nostril while you stand on this foot, it's negative calories. Or don't eat this single food group. But it is actually funny to me how often in nutrition people try to overturn the idea that energy is energy and that it cannot be lost or destroyed or created out of nowhere.
Speaker 1:But yeah, if I was a nice person instead of just yet another self-obsessed modern person using every single interaction in his life for content in hopes of monetizing all of the mundane minutiae of my life, I might have helped the guy, but I didn't. I'm a podcaster and a modern person, so I'm just going to try to monetize every aspect of my personality and experience, because that's what we're told to do these days. But yeah, so anyway, if I was this guy's trainer, I would have reminded him that, obviously, just improving the quality of your food does not necessarily result in weight loss. You must have a caloric deficit for that to happen. Devil's advocate, in a sense it's entirely possible to be in a caloric deficit with terrible food. That's the reductio ad absurdum.
Speaker 1:Let's take the opposite end to its farthest logical extent and you could literally eat nothing but Peeps and lose weight if you controlled the calories. Peeps, you remember those come around Easter time. It's just those little marshmallows. There's literally nothing in there but sugar and despite what you have heard about carbs and sugars, toxicity and all of these other things, if you ate less than your daily caloric expenditure in nothing but peeps, you 100% would lose weight. Your blood work would be terrible. There would be so many other aspects of your health that would be an absolute shambles. But for everybody who worships at the temple of stepping on the scale and seeing a lower number, it is entirely possible to achieve eating nothing but terrible foods.
Speaker 1:The thing I'm even why I'm doing this reductive Adam's is not to justify eating terrible diets. I'm just trying to point out that losing weight is indicative of calories, your energy balance and nothing else. It doesn't indicate your moral or ethical abilities. You can be very unhealthy, eat crappy food all the time, be at an acceptable weight or even lose weight. On the flip side, you could eat a whole food diet full of great, healthy foods and be gaining weight constantly if you were eating too much food.
Speaker 1:Calories in, calories out is not a singular theory by any stretch, but again, none of these other truths that we bring in overturn it. And if you are talking about weight loss, you are talking about energy balance. Here's the flip side, because I, you know, talk some shit about myself, talk some shit about this guy. But here's the thing is that actually, this guy is actually in a pretty decent place. Most likely, his body is not actually rejecting clean eating, he's just eating too much. I would be almost certain that his health has improved, but if he's not happy with how his body is looking and feeling frustrated with regard to that, all he has to do is just take the portions down just a little bit and keep the same quality foods, and then I think his health and his physique goals would potentially be addressed. But no, what this reminded me of, and why I wanted to bring up, wasn't to throw myself under the bus for being a shameless podcaster and to throw this guy under the bus for having friends that don't challenge him to change any behaviors.
Speaker 1:I think that this is a very, very common problem. We've been talking about it a lot lately, but what I consider scale obsession, singular focus on weight, has people constantly rejecting a lot more meaningful measures of health. And again, this is kind of my soapbox that I'm going to jump on every day now. But if people over 35 were as obsessed with maintaining or, dare I say, even gaining muscle, go ahead, cancel me, even though that's not a real thing. Just cancel me because I said gain weight, I'm insane. Nobody right, no one in the fitness space says that. But no, if people would get as obsessed with maintaining and yeah, I said it or even gaining muscle, the worst possible outcome according to so many people, so many of our health issues would be addressed that obsessive focus on fat reduction can never achieve.
Speaker 1:Muscle improves metabolism. Fats are needed for a healthy endocrine system. That's your hormones, and hormones are the single most important factor in how you look. A lot of other things play in. That one is the most important is the most important. It is much easier to maintain a physique when you focus on maintaining or gaining muscle than if your only move is to reduce fat. The second and third order impacts of maintaining or gaining muscle are fantastic and reinforce your goals. The second and third order impacts of reducing fat even though we do need to do it from time to time, none of them actually lead you towards your goal. The second and third order impacts are for your metabolism to. You're slowing at the end of a fat loss program, so you're probably going to rebound.
Speaker 1:In my world, where we're not scared to put on muscle, sometimes you'll actually do a six-week mini cut with the intent of predisposing your body to gain weight, so when you hit the next mass cycle you actually gain more. So again, second and third order impacts of most weight loss programs are actually going to be to add more weight in the future. Again, people like me use mini cuts to actually prime our body for growth. We don't do those little mini cuts to get lean. You do that in the middle of a bulk to keep the working. Ironically, the mini cut that I just described for bodybuilders looks a lot like the fat loss diet for non-bodybuilders that wind up yo-yoing. So anyway, I don't want to veer too far off of the stranger's question that I didn't help him with.
Speaker 1:But back to the initial statement. Why is he not making physique improvements if he is eating clean? Simple Calories still exist. You're eating too much. Not all calories are created equal and these are better choices, but again, it is possible to have too much. If I was coaching this guy, I'd remind him again that he's actually in a great place. He's already handled quality, which in my world is step one. He's controlled for that.
Speaker 1:Next let's focus on quantity. If he were to standardize his nutritional intake or log it but I like standardized nutrition because people hate logging but if he were just to adhere to a caloric threshold within a few weeks, honestly his goal would probably happen. We might tweak the macros, the amount of calories coming from protein, fat and carbohydrates along the way, but I really would like to see adherence to quantity before we get into dialing in macros, because if we don't dial in the calories first, same thing. It doesn't matter what your macros are, because you're going to be gaining weight because you're eating too much. So who cares what the macronutrient ratio is if you haven't controlled for quality and quantity first? That's always been the way I go about it and admittedly, you could dial it all in right out of the gate. This is what I used to do for people in my early 20s when I didn't have a lot of experience training real people. You just throw the kitchen sink at it right out of the gate.
Speaker 1:What I saw in my early years was that actually very, very few people can actually make all of those changes simultaneously and keep them up for any period of time. I would say most people don't get through a week. You've got some people that can really push it Easily. Less than 25% of clients that you'll have might be able to stick it out for like six weeks. And then I would say that almost none of those behaviors that you tried to coach them on will become lasting changes. They will view them as these amendments that are, like you know, break glass in case of emergency. That's what they'll do. They will just binge and purge and yo-yo. If you introduce these things slowly instead, habit stack them into getting there, they don't burn out and then, when they're done with the program, most of the behaviors actually stick and become lasting changes. So again, I say this all the time, but this actually came from First.
Speaker 1:I used to try it the other way. I would dial up everybody's nutrition, get all the macros, get everything dialed in week one, and had that approach been successful, I might still do that and coach it and preach and do all that. But again, I've just found that that is a great way to burn people out really quick and give them a bad taste on health and fitness so that they never really connect and get into it ever so. Anyway, guys, the main point of this, though it's always a benefit to switch to clean eating. I'm sorry my dude wasn't getting his physique results yet. Dial in the calories and you will.
Speaker 1:But yeah, I honestly think this is an important one, because I think too many people are still obsessively focused on fat loss. Even if you achieve that, run down the second and third order impacts of what you have achieved. It's actually not going to play out as well for your health as people tend to think. Let's even just go to some superficial aspects. If you just want your face to look decent talk to plastic surgeons around LA you actually want to keep a little bit of fat in there.
Speaker 1:Your hormones Again. There's a lot of reasons where I know how we've all been told to be skinny. It really doesn't correlate with great health. Be skinny it really doesn't correlate with great health, great performance, great hormones. I'm not sure what it's good for, quite frankly. So anyway, with my very limited space in the fitness space, I want to keep hammering home that message let's focus on gaining and maintaining lean body mass. I ain't going to lie. Y'all know I still cut periodically, but seriously, that represents I'm just being honest it's way less than 10% of my training year. I think it takes up way too much energy and attention in people's minds. But anyway, guys, that's it. Certainly won't be the last time that we bring this one up, but anyway, anyway, this one I'm excited to get into.
Speaker 1:There are more and more stories of people losing muscle mass on Ozempic and I was recently told that I could become a trillionaire if I solved this. So fun part is, I really can solve this one and it's actually only going to take a few minutes. So when this show wraps up, let's see if the money comes pouring in, because I was promised a trillion dollars and yeah, sadly, this one actually isn't even going to take as long as the last one. But you know, quick review how does Ozempic actually work? I mentioned this because we've had some drugs in the past that have done, you know, stimulated metabolism or done things to your GI tract. So I just want to establish that Ozempic and drugs like it are basically trying to mimic the hormone that makes you feel full. It's functioning essentially as an appetite suppressant and that is how these drugs are aiding in weight loss. So, obviously, depending on I've been around to see some of this stuff shift.
Speaker 1:But amphetamines were popular from the 1940s to the 1970s. It's kind of like the predominant thing. They're actually still in use today. Those were obviously stimulants that suppress the appetite. Short run they led to some weight loss. Obviously, long run, addiction, cardiovascular issues, psychological problems yeah, short run you can get some weight loss with amphetamines. Long run, I don't know if you're going to like it. Run, I don't know if you're going to like it. But no, I just bring it up because so this was one that obviously stimulated your metabolism in certain ways. If you guys remember Fen-Phen from the 90s, this one was increasing your serotonin in the brain, also leading to a decreased appetite. This one was withdrawn from the market over heart valve issues. This one was withdrawn from the market over heart valve issues.
Speaker 1:And then, actually, just while we're there, I want to actually keep it clear that today we are talking about muscle loss. I don't want to overkick our coverage on this issue. There might be other aspects of Ozempic that can reveal themselves down the line. At this juncture, when we're having this discussion, we don't have that information. Those studies haven't been done. So I am not saying that, or let's just be about what I am saying, not what I'm not saying. We are talking about Ozempic's role in muscle loss. That's it. That's the scope of the conversation today. So, yeah, let's just make sure that we are not doing too much, as I would say. But yeah, so again, I am seeing a lot of articles popping up.
Speaker 1:One. I jotted down the title we got the races on to stop Ozempic muscle loss. That's where I come in. Obviously, countless podcasts. Everybody's trying to ride the SEO wave right now. Anyway, I've been promising I can solve it. Let's take a look at it.
Speaker 1:Obviously, we just got done with a segment talking about muscle loss. You know what I think? I think it's a big deal. You hear me talk about it all the time and so again, no challenge coming. Your healthy muscle is very, very, very, very, very important. The less of it you have, the less efficient you are, the harder all of your other fitness goals. Get Ozumpic. And none of these companies are paying me. Eli Lilly, by the way, but yeah, just shout him out. Hey, if you guys want, maybe this is beneficial, I don't know Pay me. But no inconvenient truth in this stuff, guys, and I'm not shilling for Ozempic they don't pay me anything. Every time you lose weight, you lose muscle, fyi. That's why I literally just got done talking about that obsessive focus on fat reduction so many times backfires and blows up in people's faces and sets them down a course of worse and worse health.
Speaker 1:Um, we have talked at length many times about how, um to not reduce your muscle, or so how to how to minimize your muscle loss. When dieting Short version, you got to keep your protein up. You got to strength train through the fat loss cycle, or it's going to be weight loss, not fat loss, which is not as cool as it sounds. You want fat loss, not weight loss. So again, whether using Ozempic or not, if you are taking in less energy than you need, that's what you need to do to lose weight. If you are doing that, there is a great chance that you will also lose some muscle. It is absolutely unavoidable. There is no diet where you don't lose fat and muscle.
Speaker 1:The question becomes how much muscle will you lose? So the relevant question then, as it comes into Ozempic, would actually be not will you lose muscle using Ozempic? The answer, you should already know, will obviously be yes. That's clear. You should know that before we even start. The part you want to learn about is is there going to be any difference or will you lose more muscle using Ozempic than using other approaches? That is the question that people need to be asking, and nobody has yet. So here we are. We finally got there. Will you lose more muscle if you use Ozempic than if you don't?
Speaker 1:Um, so, on average, uh, when people are not using Ozempic uh, typical weight loss program you're probably losing between 20 and 50% of your weight from muscle mass. So we have a couple of studies on Manjaro and Zebound. I don't even know that none of my clients are on that, but anyway, those two showed about a 25%. 25% of weight loss came from muscle. There was a study done on Ozempic showing about 40% of weight loss coming from muscle. So quick refresh On average, when people are losing weight on their own or just dieting, you expect between 20 and 50% of weight loss to come from muscle. The studies that we have on this current batch of weight loss drugs range from 25% to 40%. So these are actually in the range of normal muscle loss.
Speaker 1:You guys know I love shooting down, I love to be a contrarian and I love to shoot something down. So if I could I would take the shot, but there's actually nothing to see here. Again, I'm pretty consistent in my concern about worrying about muscle loss through other means of diet and I would all just sort of point out few other people have that track record. So I just think it's meaningful that I am not concerned about muscle loss from Ozempic and other people who haven't been speaking on this issue are no-transcript. But no, there's just so many fallacies that are playing in and I'm not shilling for them. If a new study comes out talking about a risk, we're going to run right into it. I don't care, but just the things people are mentioning now are unsubstantiated and are actually kind of evidence of the fact that they have some bad ideas about fat loss in general. So, like one I hear a lot even is like ozempic face, that's called weight loss face.
Speaker 1:Every time you lose weight you're going to lose fat from your face or you're going to lose fat from everywhere and you don't actually get to pick where. That gets down to your genetics. So you've probably heard all the stories. But some women get upset about which fat stores leave first. Some guys get upset about which area likes to retain it last. Just keep in mind when you lose weight, you're going to lose it from everywhere. You don't get to point to your least favorite spot and lose the fat from that spot. Whether you rub creams and jellies, do your mood boards.
Speaker 1:People have tried to come up with ways to spot, reduce and target. None of it works Literally none of it. All you really can do is just be aware and try to maintain your muscle mass whenever you are losing weight. That's going to be your best general practice. But beyond that you don't get to pick. Ladies, sorry, Sometimes it comes out of the bust or the rear Guys, sometimes the love handles are the last thing to drop. You're lean everywhere else and you still have that little back fat thing that you hate. That's genes. That's not a curse, it's not anybody plotting against you, and there is nothing you can do to lose that particular spot that you don't like you know, reframe it, think about it a little differently, and I think it generally gets better. But if you keep trying to, you know, do these things that frankly don't work. It's just going to make you more frustrated and feel lost. Best practice I don't care whether you're on Ozempic or not, this is going to apply to everybody.
Speaker 1:You should be strength training and fueling adequate protein throughout your fat loss cycle. Said it already if you don't do that, it's going to be a weight loss cycle, and who cares? You probably might have been better off without doing it, because you might be back to needing it in short order Again. Last thing, and then we'll just kind of move on because there really isn't much else to say here. If there are issues with Ozempic that pop, we will talk about it. But right now, as people are talking about again the muscle loss things like that, I actually think pretty clearly there is nothing to see here. I'm not going to get my trillion dollars because there's nothing to solve. Quite frankly, every time you lose weight, you lose muscle, on average, 20% to 50%. Even without Ozempic, the new weight loss drugs, people don't appear to be losing muscle at faster rates. So yeah, with regard to the issue of muscle loss and weight loss drugs, I'm pretty confident in saying nothing to see here. I don't think that this would be an issue if people had some better ideas about how you actually go achieve fat loss versus weight loss, and I hope I covered that difference well enough here.
Speaker 1:Anyway, guys, last one of the day, so yeah, in my direct messages last week, I got one an Instagram reel about PFAs in sparkling water recently, and you know, admittedly, because I saw the dates on all the articles and all the studies I was reading, this is not the most current story, so I'm a little bit behind it here. A lot of the stuff I'm going to be quoting today was actually coming out of some studies done about two and three years ago. So, anyway, we're not breaking any ground here today, but I missed this. My client was dealing with it, so maybe we're not the only ones, but yes, so, admittedly, guys, I really didn't know about this one. I had to look it up First place.
Speaker 1:I started was literally a definition, so per and polyfluoroalkylized substances, pfas they're chemicals in various industries that have been around since the 1940s. They're known for resisting grease, oil, water, heat, commonly found in nonstick cookware, water-repelling clothing, stain-resistant fabrics, food packaging and because of their widespread use and persistence in the environment, pfas have now been called forever chemicals. There was a relatively recent study within the last couple of weeks or so that they're literally finding them everywhere, guys they're in your testicles, they're in basically all over the entire planet. So, yeah, these things are a big deal and, as our name indicates, forever chemicals, they don't go anywhere.
Speaker 1:I did want to be careful investigating this because I remember a few years back when GMOs hit and the group of people that I talked to that were the least convinced by it were actually scientists the scientists I spoke with about it. Their main contention was GMO was too broad and that the public discussion around it was pretty infantile and stupid and meaningless, and I know that they were just actually frustrated at least the ones that I spoke to personally were just frustrated with the information discourse a lot of stuff that I bitch and moan about here all the time that you can't really have an adult conversation in the media about these things because people have too many, you know, people have too many incentives other than getting the truth out, and I don't even know if the appetite for the subtlety of nuance is out there. Quite frankly, even if you offer it, will people click it? Will people read it? Probably not, to be totally honest. Um, so we can't just like bemoan they for indoctrinating us. No, most of us are lazy and that's why we get what we get. But anyway, not to get sidetracked. But no, not all PFAs are created equal. So I at least wanted to dive into some of the context lest we just start broadly labeling something. There's a little bit more nuance there and admittedly, I was ignorant coming in.
Speaker 1:So what I found is that PFAs do encompass a wide variety of chemicals. A lot of them have very different properties and different levels of toxicities. The health risks associated with PFAs are going to be dependent on the duration and frequency of the exposure. They're not all equivalent. Acute exposure to high levels of PFAs is, of course, going to be more immediately harmful, while if you were to exhibit chronic low-level exposure over time, you would have a different set of long-term health risks associated cancer, liver damage, some pretty bad stuff, quite frankly. But a lot of factors are going to influence how PFAs affect you, factors like age, your current health status Obviously, somebody whose health status is not good is going to be more compromised. Your genes can influence how they affect you. The most vulnerable populations to PFAs are going to be, not shockingly, but pregnant women, infants, individuals with pre-existing health conditions. These are all going to be groups that are more susceptible to the effects of PFAs.
Speaker 1:We're focused on water, sparkling water, specifically sparkling water. You know specifically, but what I found was that the EPA has set advisories on PFAs in water at about 70 parts per trillion. So now, when we look at the studies that came out on sparkling water, in fairness to the sparkling water makers, they were well below that threshold. The highest one tested was Topo Chico, at 9.76 parts per trillion. And then again, because I'm not new to this story, actually Topo Chico has already responded to this story and reduced it down to 3.9. So even at that 3.9, that still puts it higher than many other ones that are on the market. Polar and Bubbly are going to round out your three worst sparkling waters.
Speaker 1:As it pertains to PFAs, the ones that tested better are going to be Spindrift. Spindrift was undetectable. Lacroix and Perrier had trace levels, but they rounded out the top three. And yeah, again, I'm new to this. So you know, don't take my word as the final gospel. But in my opinion, the detection of any level of PFA, I think, is a concern and this kind of just gets to the fact that they are persistent and accumulate in the body. So I think the drink makers are going to be well within their rational and, frankly, legal obligations to say exactly what I just said, that they are below the EPA thresholds. That's true and I don't see any issue there, any issue there. But as an individual I don't see any upside to taking NPFAs.
Speaker 1:And then, obviously, with sparkling water, there's just so many easy substitutes to go into. And admittedly, guys, topo Chico is actually one of my favorite sparkling waters. So yeah, I guess I'm just speaking from the experience of it really isn't that hard to substitute if you need to. And yeah, I wouldn't say that I'm like scared of a Topo Chico with the you know level of PFAs that are in there. But you know, if I'm gonna buy a 12 pack and I'm at the grocery store, why wouldn't I grab a Spindrift in light of that information? But no, I guess too, just before I because I'm going to say obviously what I'm about to say I don't want to sort of weigh in and get people scared and unduly worried, which actually I might intentionally do anyway, but at least, hey, let's not be scared and unintentionally over-worried about our sparkling water.
Speaker 1:To give us a little bit more context seafood is generally the highest food that you're probably going to be sourcing regularly, for PFAs sometimes exceeding 1000 parts per trillion. So remember, the worst sparkling water tested was like 9.76. And it now runs more like 3.9. It is not uncommon for seafood to have, you know, levels as high as 1000 parts per trillion, which is just massively higher than any sparkling water that you're going to eat. I'm really not trying to make fun of this in any way, but seafood consumers tend to always believe that they're getting great seafood. I've really never talked to somebody who doesn't think they're getting great food.
Speaker 1:But then when I go read the studies on the seafood industry myself, mislabeling is a rampant problem. The people I talk to who eat fish they seem to believe that they have always eaten whatever they have ordered. The studies I read make it seem like that is highly unlikely. Even if you are going to the best restaurants in LA, new York and San Francisco, you are actually constantly eating mislabeled fish, obviously with the PFAs. I think why it's so relevant is we were mentioning. Pfas are everywhere, so they're obviously in our water too. Poor environmental conditions are a huge problem in the seafood industry.
Speaker 1:Fish is good for you. We're not knocking all that, I'm just trying to point out this is literally one of the most difficult foods to source and you're generally going to find a lot of health-focused people who will be doing it regularly. Actually, real quick, I just want to make so many people around. Los Angeles is almost like an overheard in LA, but you know I'm always talking nutrition with folks, but whenever people like tell me they're a pescatarian, it always has this like sound of moral superiority in it. So one of my favorite retorts to that that sound is, oh, I'm pescatarian. And I'll say, damn right, fuck fish. And they're like what? And I'm like that's right. Oh, I'm pescatarian and I'll say, damn right, fuck fish. And they're like what? And I'm like that's right, brother, I fucking hate them too. Kill them all. And they're like, no, no, that's not what I'm like. Say no more, fam, fuck fish, but no, anyway, I'm really not trying to mean seafood, I'm just pointing out it's literally one of the riskiest things that people source regularly. We can move on.
Speaker 1:Processed foods are also going to be a good source of PFAs. Well, or a bad source, I guess that we should say. But looking about it, can range from 10 to 300 parts per trillion. So, ironically, processed food actually safer than most seafood, meat and dairy. You're typically going to be coming in under 50 parts per trillion. That's also some you know, significant, significantly more risk than sparkling water. Frame it there when we get into foods that have similar risk to sparkling water, you're talking fruits and vegetables. Most of these are going to be coming in around one to 10 parts per trillion. So now we are finally at that similar risk threshold to sparkling water. So anyway, I know I might have just scared everybody with that, but I still maintain that consumers should be informed, not unduly worried. Nearly everything we consume has PFAs in it, so you just kind of have to be conscious while not worrying about it so much that it makes it so you can't act or make a choice.
Speaker 1:I think it's obvious that we should strive to reduce our exposure to PFAs and since all of this started around our sparkling water, to be totally honest, after doing the research I did, I think sparkling water might be one of the easiest choices that you have in that regard. Obviously, we already mentioned it Topo, chico, slash Coke they were the worst. They've already been reactive because they don't want to lose market share and even in light of that fact, you and I already know they have 3.9 parts per trillion and we know what their competitors are at. So I actually think that's probably one of the easiest choices that you can make. It's incredibly easy to substitute brands.
Speaker 1:Again, I came into this relatively uninformed. I picked up, I learned a little bit, but I'm actually leaving this issue way less concerned about my sparkling water and more concerned about damn near everything else. We've only talked like the food aspects of it. But your cookware, obviously that's a big deal. A lot of the nonstick pans. You're going to be getting a lot of PFAs from there.
Speaker 1:Your clothes I went and looked some uh studies on different brands. So here you go, we'll do some quick grades. Levi's and victoria's secret got an a. Not many pfas in their stuff. Ralph loren, gap, american eagle, calvin klein, tommy hill figure they got a b. Um abercrombie and fitch that I used to work at in college. They've've recently been rediscovered, kind of a darling of Wall Street and young people. These days they get a C. Nike came in with a D+ LOB. North Face, timberland and Costco all got Ds, and Under Armour, skechers, columbia, rei, wolverine, kohl's, nordstrom's, macy's, walmart, penny's all got an F. So anyway, I do think one of the bigger ones is probably going to be clothes. There we go Levi's and Victoria's Secret you're good to go, yeah, no, no. So anyway, it actually got me a lot less concerned about my sparkling water, a lot more concerned about a lot of other things.
Speaker 1:When I was kind of getting to the question of how do I reduce my exposure to PFAs. I think one of the most impactful um easiest ones is going to be to replace your nonstick cookware with cast iron, stainless steel, glass or ceramic. You're going to want to avoid microwaving foods in general. Definitely don't warm up in the packages that they came in. Most foods that are designed to be made in a microwave. You're going to have a bunch of it there. Also going to want to avoid fast food, processed food, and especially the packages that they come in. When we get back to water, it's a concern, but the parts petroleum and water are significantly lower than all of the other segments that we're talking about. That being said, it's easy enough to invest in water filters. Make sure you're reading up when you're when you're buying. There are filters that can get the PFAs out, um, but again, that being said, I actually think water is probably one of the easier ones to deal with, um with, because of the persistence and availability of these things. I actually think it's other segments where we're probably getting our biggest exposures.
Speaker 1:Like we always say, controlling for quality and food this was something that I think that I did unintentionally. That was allowing me to control in some capacity to reduce, because you just use less packaging and typically the context that the food was grown in if you're shopping at farmers markets in good places, is better on average than other places. So I still think it's a good idea to control for quality. That can see you out of a lot of these issues, not 100%, but certainly most of it. I guess, just with food, clothes, cook or all of it, we kind of have to be conscious and mindful about what we're sourcing, not just sparkling water, which that you know. I'm only saying it that way because it is kind of like that fear tactic thing flying around social media. So you know, by all means source your sparkling water intelligently, but I would argue that you should also be sourcing everything else intelligently, and sparkling water might not be the most meaningful segment in your diet to be focusing on.
Speaker 1:But anyway, long-winded here. So I actually answered the question in real life. I just told my client that the study was real. Topo Chico was the worst. Unfortunately, that's her favorite too, which actually quick, we've been doing.
Speaker 1:Ranch water I don't even drink, so maybe already everybody knows this. But if I drink, one of my favorite drinks was a Topo Chico and a little bit of tequila. You know we're not we'll do this in a separate topic one day because I'm wrapping up but clear liquors, those are going to be your friend Top shelf agave. The more it's distilled, the worse or the less likely you are to have a hangover. So if Simon drinks, I could clear liquor, clear top shelf liquor, and I was usually going to chase it or cut it with some water so I don't feel as bad in the morning. But yeah, I don't know, I'm already thinking about that. I could maybe just swap that out for like a, I don't know, like a grapefruit spindrift, do like a Paloma inspired something or other, but no, it's a bummer. I really do like Topo Chico.
Speaker 1:But actually here, demonstrable moment. I just found out that a product that I was using is not the best there is. I'm not trying to change the studies that I read, I'm just kind of taking my knocks. You know, take this one on the chin and move on. I'm not going to engage in a lot of techniques that I know how to do to rationalize the choice that I made a while ago. So anyway, this, I think, is how you also deal with new information when something you like, if you find out that maybe it's not so good. You know, here's how you handle it Anyway.
Speaker 1:So yeah, my client typically does buy um. There's almost always like topos lacroix's spindrifts in the little party fridge, and so, on my way out she handed me a lacroix and um. You know, tasted great and you know, by the way, lacroix first one's free um. We can make a thing of this. If you guys give me a call, I'll talk up the brand whenever you want. But um, no, anyway, I thought there's actually a relatively easy one. I was just telling her you know more Spindrift, more LaCroix. You know, maybe we run down the Topo Chico for now, but hey, fingers crossed, coca-cola will keep moving them. You know closer to where their competitors are at so I can get back into my glass bottles. But anyway, guys, we are up on time. I just want to quickly sum it all up.
Speaker 1:But don't worry too much about your sparkling water choice. There are definitely better options than some, but exposure to PFAs is going to be significantly greater in almost every area of your life. I think you will do well to avoid those exposures. There's no upside. But sparkling water is not the most meaningful or dangerous choice that you're making, not even close the talk that I'm hearing right now about muscle loss from weight loss drugs trendy and exaggerated.
Speaker 1:There may be other issues with these drugs. Muscle loss isn't one of them. Muscle loss is always an issue when you are losing weight. Just because I said that, that's not a green light or an endorsement of these drugs. Fat loss 100% can be achieved without these drugs, but I just don't think that the current cycle talking about muscle loss from Ozempic. I don't think that's an issue. You always lose muscle when you lose weight. It's always an issue with caloric deficits. So nothing to see there as far as I'm concerned.
Speaker 1:Clean eating obviously does not negate calories. Eating clean does not upend thermodynamics. A calorie is still a calorie. Energy cannot be lost or created. So, yeah, even clean eating cannot upend thermodynamics. If you've improved your food quality and you're not seeing your physique improve, you're still eating too much. Just control for quantity and you'll be on track very, very quickly, not a big problem. Can feel frustrating, but that one's really pretty easy.
Speaker 1:And then, last but not least I'm definitely saying this one for me again make sure, guys, that you're taking time for the little thing. Stay present, be available to those who count on you. Anytime you open yourself up to that. There's a great chance. That actually is the most important thing that you did all day, no matter what you thought you were going to get done. So anyway, guys, with that, as always, I appreciate you hanging out with me, spending your time. Yeah, make sure to share this show. If there's anything in here that helped you guys out, pass it on to someone else. Same commitment, guys. I'm going to keep trying to learn and share what I'm getting on my ride with you guys. Remember, mind and muscle are inseparably intertwined. There are no gains without brains. Keep lifting and learning. You know what I'll do.
