The Unified Theory of Nutrition For Weight Loss and Muscle Gain

When people hear the term Unified Theory, some times called the Grand Unified Theory, or even “Theory of Everything,” they probably think of it in terms of physics, where a Unified Theory, or single theory capable of defining the nature of the interrelationships among nuclear, electromagnetic, and gravitational forces, would reconcile seemingly incompatible aspects of various field theories to create a single comprehensive set of equations.

Such a theory could potentially unlock all the secrets of nature and the universe itself, or as theoretical physicist Michio Katu, puts it “an equation an inch long that would allow us to read the mind of God.” That’s how important unified theories can be. However, unified theories don’t have to deal with such heady topics as physics or the nature of the universe itself, but can be applied to far more mundane topics, in this case nutrition.

Regardless of the topic, a unified theory, as sated above, seeks to explain seemingly incompatible aspects of various theories. In this article I attempt to unify seemingly incompatible or opposing views regarding nutrition, namely, what is probably the longest running debate in the nutritional sciences: calories vs. macro nutrients.

One school, I would say the ‘old school’ of nutrition, maintains weight loss or weight gain is all about calories, and “a calorie is a calorie,” no matter the source (e.g., carbs, fats, or proteins). They base their position on various lines of evidence to come to that conclusion.

The other school, I would call more the ‘new school’ of thought on the issue, would state that gaining or losing weight is really about where the calories come from (e.g., carbs, fats, and proteins), and that dictates weight loss or weight gain. Meaning, they feel, the “calorie is a calorie” mantra of the old school is wrong. They too come to this conclusion using various lines of evidence.

This has been an ongoing debate between people in the field of nutrition, biology, physiology, and many other disciplines, for decades. The result of which has led to conflicting advice and a great deal of confusion by the general public, not to mention many medical professionals and other groups.

Before I go any further, two key points that are essential to understand about any unified theory:

A good unified theory is simple, concise, and understandable even to lay people. However, underneath, or behind that theory, is often a great deal of information that can take up many volumes of books. So, for me to outline all the information I have used to come to these conclusions, would take a large book, if not several and is far beyond the scope of this article.

A unified theory is often proposed by some theorist before it can even be proven or fully supported by physical evidence. Over time, different lines of evidence, whether it be mathematical, physical, etc., supports the theory and thus solidifies that theory as being correct, or continued lines of evidence shows the theory needs to be revised or is simply incorrect. I feel there is now more than enough evidence at this point to give a unified theory of nutrition and continuing lines of evidence will continue (with some possible revisions) to solidify the theory as fact.
“A calorie is a calorie”

The old school of nutrition, which often includes most nutritionists, is a calorie is a calorie when it comes to gaining or losing weight. That weight loss or weight gain is strictly a matter of “calories in, calories out.” Translated, if you “burn” more calories than you take in, you will lose weight regardless of the calorie source and if you eat more calories than you burn off each day, you will gain weight, regardless of the calorie source.

This long held and accepted view of nutrition is based on the fact that protein and carbs contain approx 4 calories per gram and fat approximately 9 calories per gram and the source of those calories matters not. They base this on the many studies that finds if one reduces calories by X number each day, weight loss is the result and so it goes if you add X number of calories above what you use each day for gaining weight.

However, the “calories in calories out” mantra fails to take into account modern research that finds that fats, carbs, and proteins have very different effects on the metabolism via countless pathways, such as their effects on hormones (e.g., insulin, leptin, glucagon, etc), effects on hunger and appetite, thermic effects (heat production), effects on uncoupling proteins (UCPs), and 1000 other effects that could be mentioned.

Even worse, this school of thought fails to take into account the fact that even within a macro nutrient, they too can have different effects on metabolism. This school of thought ignores the ever mounting volume of studies that have found diets with different macro nutrient ratios with identical calorie intakes have different effects on body composition, cholesterol levels, oxidative stress, etc.

Translated, not only is the mantra “a calorie us a calorie” proven to be false, “all fats are created equal” or “protein is protein” is also incorrect. For example, we no know different fats (e.g. fish oils vs. saturated fats) have vastly different effects on metabolism and health in general, as we now know different carbohydrates have their own effects (e.g. high GI vs. low GI), as we know different proteins can have unique effects.

The “calories don’t matter” school of thought

This school of thought will typically tell you that if you eat large amounts of some particular macro nutrient in their magic ratios, calories don’t matter. For example, followers of ketogenic style diets that consist of high fat intakes and very low carbohydrate intakes (i.e., Atkins, etc.) often maintain calories don’t matter in such a diet.

Others maintain if you eat very high protein intakes with very low fat and carbohydrate intakes, calories don’t matter. Like the old school, this school fails to take into account the effects such diets have on various pathways and ignore the simple realities of human physiology, not to mention the laws of thermodynamics!

The reality is, although it’s clear different macro nutrients in different amounts and ratios have different effects on weight loss, fat loss, and other metabolic effects, calories do matter. They always have and they always will. The data, and real world experience of millions of dieters, is quite clear on that reality.

The truth behind such diets is that they are often quite good at suppressing appetite and thus the person simply ends up eating fewer calories and losing weight. Also, the weight loss from such diets is often from water vs. fat, at least in the first few weeks. That’s not to say people can’t experience meaningful weight loss with some of these diets, but the effect comes from a reduction in calories vs. any magical effects often claimed by proponents of such diets.

Weight loss vs. fat loss!

This is where we get into the crux of the true debate and why the two schools of thought are not actually as far apart from one another as they appear to the untrained eye. What has become abundantly clear from the studies performed and real world evidence is that to lose weight we need to use more calories than we take in (via reducing calorie intake and or increasing exercise), but we know different diets have different effects on the metabolism, appetite, body composition, and other physiological variables…

Brink’s Unified Theory of Nutrition

…Thus, this reality has led me to Brink’s Unified Theory of Nutrition which states:

“Total calories dictates how much weight a person gains or loses; macro nutrient ratios dictates what a person gains or loses”

This seemingly simple statement allows people to understand the differences between the two schools of thought. For example, studies often find that two groups of people put on the same calorie intakes but very different ratios of carbs, fats, and proteins will lose different amounts of body fat and or lean body mass (i.e., muscle, bone, etc.).

Some studies find for example people on a higher protein lower carb diet lose approximately the same amount of weight as another group on a high carb lower protein diet, but the group on the higher protein diet lost more actual fat and less lean body mass (muscle). Or, some studies using the same calorie intakes but different macro nutrient intakes often find the higher protein diet may lose less actual weight than the higher carb lower protein diets, but the actual fat loss is higher in the higher protein low carb diets. This effect has also been seen in some studies that compared high fat/low carb vs. high carb/low fat diets. The effect is usually amplified if exercise is involved as one might expect.

Of course these effects are not found universally in all studies that examine the issue, but the bulk of the data is clear: diets containing different macro nutrient ratios do have different effects on human physiology even when calorie intakes are identical (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11).

Or, as the authors of one recent study that looked at the issue concluded:

“Diets with identical energy contents can have different effects on leptin concentrations, energy expenditure, voluntary food intake, and nitrogen balance, suggesting that the physiologic adaptations to energy restriction can be modified by dietary composition.”(12)

The point being, there are many studies confirming that the actual ratio of carbs, fats, and proteins in a given diet can effect what is actually lost (i.e., fat, muscle, bone, and water) and that total calories has the greatest effect on how much total weight is lost. Are you starting to see how my unified theory of nutrition combines the “calorie is a calorie” school with the “calories don’t matter” school to help people make decisions about nutrition?

Knowing this, it becomes much easier for people to understand the seemingly conflicting diet and nutrition advice out there (of course this does not account for the down right unscientific and dangerous nutrition advice people are subjected to via bad books, TV, the ‘net, and well meaning friends, but that’s another article altogether).

Knowing the above information and keeping the Unified Theory of Nutrition in mind, leads us to some important and potentially useful conclusions:

An optimal diet designed to make a person lose fat and retain as much LBM as possible is not the same as a diet simply designed to lose weight.

A nutrition program designed to create fat loss is not simply a reduced calorie version of a nutrition program designed to gain weight, and visa versa.

Diets need to be designed with fat loss, NOT just weight loss, as the goal, but total calories can’t be ignored.

This is why the diets I design for people-or write about-for gaining or losing weight are not simply higher or lower calorie versions of the same diet. In short: diets plans I design for gaining LBM start with total calories and build macro nutrient ratios into the number of calories required. However, diets designed for fat loss (vs. weight loss!) start with the correct macro nutrient ratios that depend on variables such as amount of LBM the person carries vs. body fat percent , activity levels, etc., and figure out calories based on the proper macro nutrient ratios to achieve fat loss with a minimum loss of LBM. The actual ratio of macro nutrients can be quite different for both diets and even for individuals.

Diets that give the same macro nutrient ratio to all people (e.g., 40/30/30, or 70,30,10, etc.) regardless of total calories, goals, activity levels, etc., will always be less than optimal. Optimal macro nutrient ratios can change with total calories and other variables.

Perhaps most important, the unified theory explains why the focus on weight loss vs. fat loss by the vast majority of people, including most medical professionals, and the media, will always fail in the long run to deliver the results people want.

Fountains in Medical Practice Creating a Relaxed Atmosphere

Commercial fountains will improve your office environment and promote your business. With the new year approaching, now is the right time to take advantage of investments in commercial fountains.

No matter what the style or design of the landscape, or whether the fountain will be inside or outside, there is a commercial fountain that is right for your business setting. The idea that you can add a commercial fountain to your business, no matter what your budget, is very interesting. A private fountain that shows off your business and does some advertising for you is something you should not miss.

A special commercial fountain is the best way to add a friendly, organic feel to your business. Inside or outside, a wall fountain with your business logo engraved on it will make customers remember you. Why not consider a wall fountain to hang behind the reception desk with your company name for an amazing effect. You can even install it at the entrance or outside the door. If you have a yard or large area before the entrance, an outdoor commercial fountain will be very attractive to your guests and visitors.

Commercial fountains offer an atmosphere of natural relaxation. While large tiered fountains add a traditional look to parks and restaurants, contemporary flat wall fountains add depth to reception or any waiting area.

The Massage Therapy business and Day Spa often use commercial fountains and the Children’s Hospital incorporates fountains to create a pleasant and healthy environment.

Doctors, dentists, chiropractors, and psychologists can increase waiting rooms. Imagine a patient waiting for their appointment and can relax and listen to the sound of running water rather than the music of the elevator or the suppressing silence.

In today’s economy, it is more important to keep customers and clients returning to your place of business. Business owners are always looking for creative ways to market their business, to get people at the door, and more importantly, to keep them coming back. Water features can do this.

Incorporate commercial fountains into your business environment and reap the many benefits they bring. offers many commercial fountains. Let one of their fountain experts tell you today.

Now emerging from the fog of a colorful and varied career, Ian Patterson was born early in life somewhere in a long-forgotten zip code. The mantra he learned from his parents, while growing on their farm was “if you want it to be done right, then do it yourself”.

Interval Training on Treadmills – Take Your Cardio Routine to the Next Level

People are always looking for new ways to stay motivated about sports and make their cardio exercises more fun and enjoyable. In most cases they add new elements, such as the weight lifting circuit, the bells circuit or the weight circuit, forgetting to rest sufficiently between each new exercise. It can be very fun to do a number of circuits, because they will increase your metabolism and help your body burn fat quickly. Unfortunately, this routine rarely helps you to tighten or increase your muscle tissue, especially if you don’t separate the cardio session from the weight-based training session.

What type of people will get the most out of using a treadmill for interval training?

The fact is that whatever your goal, high intensity interval training on a treadmill will help you to build muscle mass without excessive protrusions like you do with heavy work. I usually like to do low volumes, like 2-4 reps per set, strength training for most of the year. You really can make a definition and tight muscle density without increasing the amount or increasing fatigue if you do this type of training while creating a calorie deficit in your diet. You can increase the intensity of the program and burn more body fat and calories if you add a very aggressive interval training program to your treadmill.

This result is why I feel interval training is your best bet.

Next time you go to the fitness center, you will see many people using a treadmill for walking or jogging as part of their routine exercise routine. Although this type of cardio exercise on a treadmill is beneficial to your health and burns calories, this cardio exercise will not increase your metabolism and can require long hours of work for very little results. High intensity interval training helps your body to burn fat, maintain muscle, and release the hormones needed to be physically fit.

Stable cardio

When you do this type of aerobic activity at the same or similar speed throughout your workout, it is called a steady state cardio. Solid cardio training and high intensity interval training will help you lose weight and burn excess fat, but together they are absolute magic!

It is important to note that your cardio must be done on a different exercise machine from a treadmill. For example, I like to do cardio steady state work on ellipses.

Interval Training + Stable Status

You should always do interval training at the beginning of your routine and on an empty stomach. This type of exercise will release non-food energy-based fat cells into your bloodstream. You should then rest for 5 minutes before starting a steady exercise routine to burn all the fat cells released into your bloodstream through intensive interval training.

Fit People See Better Cardio Results

For a long time I will do my high intensity interval training with sprints done at 60 seconds or less. This routine helps me to be lean, but I want to take it to the next level and get a better shape. But then I discovered and read a USA Today article that talks about the importance of increasing your Vo2 max, an indicator of your actual body fitness level. I have now arranged my treadmill exercises differently since finding the article and therefore I feel and look much better.

Exercise Routine

This exercise should be done 4 days every week after your weight training session.

Monday – Perform 4 minutes of running alternating with 3 minutes of walking for approximately 30 minutes, doing a total routine of 4-5 times.

Tuesday – Perform 2 minutes of running alternating with 2 minutes of walking for approximately 30 minutes, doing a total of 7-8 times.

Wednesday – There is no training.

Thursday – Perform 1 minute of running alternating with 1 minute of walking for approximately 15 minutes, which must be followed by steady state cardio work for another 15 minutes.

Friday – Perform 30 seconds of running alternating with 30 seconds of running for approximately 10 minutes, which must be followed by a steady 20 minutes of cardio work.

Saturday – No training.

Sunday – Do not exercise.

The absolute best cardio workout you can do for your health and body is high intensity interval training on a treadmill.

Finding the Right Alternative Allergy Treatment

Allergies plague many people around the world every year. There are many allergens in the air and they seem to multiply many times. Finding effective and long-lasting treatments is important for many allergy sufferers.

There are a large number of allergy treatments that have been used for years, but now people are trying to find alternatives to these treatments. This is partly because the allergic season seems to last longer than before, but finding alternative treatments is also becoming more relevant because of frequent use of natural and alternative medicines.

The Nabudripad Allergy Removal Technique (NAET) is an alternative allergy treatment that is increasingly popular and is increasingly being used. This type of treatment is based on unexpected reactions that occur from any substance that usually does not produce certain reactions in other people. When considered in this context, only a few allergens can be measured through standard medical tests that have been developed to detect and diagnose allergies.

The reason for this is that the cause of the imbalance that causes allergies is believed to be due to the weakening of the meridian energy. In the NAET definition, pollen, dust, and food have the potential to be allergens. In contrast to traditional beliefs and practices regarding what are considered allergens, factors such as vitamins, hormones or even thoughts, beliefs and emotions that might be able to block the free flow of vital energy or chi can be considered as allergens.

Although the methods of determining and treating allergies are different from those used traditionally, the end goal is the same. The purpose of NAET as an alternative to allergies is to treat the problem and free the body of unwanted allergic reactions that cause difficulties. It is also considered a safe alternative because it does not use harsh chemicals that are often present in various traditional allergy treatments and medicines. These allergy alternatives are all natural and are becoming very popular among allergy sufferers everywhere, although some are still skeptical of legitimacy.

When diagnosing and determining the presence or absence of allergens, the NAET method uses a muscle response test. This is used to determine whether various acupuncture meridians fall into a weak state when a sample of a suspected allergen is held by the patient. Muscle response is a simple method that is easy to use and will detect stress caused by various allergic reactions that are believed to exist. When allergens are detected, various alternative methods can be used to treat problems in a natural and effective way.

There are many other alternative allergy treatments available, including non-invasive laser allergy treatments with the BAX3000 allergy elimination system.

  • Partner links