I Deal in Absolutes. So Should You.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008 9:03
One of my clients this morning was particularly interested in his bodyfat percentage. While taking it I reminded him that the percentages are misleading and that a much more useful number is the absolute value of lean body mass (read: muscle) and fat mass, and that it’s much more useful to look at 2.4 pounds more of fat mass than a 1.5% increase in bodyfat.
I deal in absolutes, mostly because they’re more useful and informative than percentages. Percentages can be useful, but misleading.
For example, if you gain 5 pounds of muscle but lose no fat, you will show a lower bodyfat percentage. But if your goal is losing fat, then you haven’t been successful and need to tweak your diet accordingly. In this case, just going by percentage can lead you away from the actual useful information. More importantly, it can lead you to believe you’re doing the right thing when you’re not.
This can be applied to diet as well. We’ve heard how a skewed Omega 6:Omega 3 fatty acid intake is correlated with diseases of civilization; well, what if it’s not the ratio per se, but the absolute amounts of fatty acids we eat that matter? Then, it becomes easy to reduce your ratio of Omega 6:Omega 3 fatty acids; simply eliminate vegetable oils (which are rife with Omega 6 fatty acids) and include fish oil in your diet. No complex charts or lists to memorize, no interstate ordering of grass-fed beef required (although grass-fed is healthier for you).
There’s nothing wrong with quick-look measures like percentage increase/decrease, but for the whole story, deal with the absolute numbers. Likely, the things you’re measuring (such as body fat) aren’t pinpoint accurate anyway.
fred hahn (2 comments) says:
March 25th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Indeed! VG point. Although if you do increase lean mass significantly without a concomitant increase in fat mass dropping your total BF% down significantly, you’ll still appear a lot leaner. Trouble is, this is nearly impossible to do!
Great post.
Tobi (1 comments) says:
March 25th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Grass fed beef is definitely better than grain fed. There are numerous reasons to leave grain fed alone. I am interested what prices you would find fair when it comes to grass fed beef prices. I am soon opening a grass fed meat restaurant and also plan on shipping it out to people. I will also look into jerky. This will be interesting to those that like beef but are not willing to pay the heavy shipping cost grass fed is associated with in most cases.
We should gather a group of athletes and make a grass fed beef deal for the year on jerky. Would athletes be interested in grass fed beef jerky? That would be another question.
Grass Fed Beef doesn’t = expensive meat!
Chris H (1 comments) says:
April 2nd, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Barry Goroves has an interesting piece. He points to a study which concludes:
A high intake of n-3 fatty acids does not appear to protect against COPD or asthma, but a high intake of several n-6 fatty acids is associated with a significant reduction in FEV1, particularly in smokers. These findings indicate that high dietary intake of n-6 fatty acids, rather than reduced n-3 intake, may have an adverse effect on lung health.
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/omega-6-lungs.html
Eugene Thong (22 comments) says:
April 9th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Thanks for the link to the Groves piece, Chris. I’ve thought that decreasing intake of “bad” stuff far outweighs increasing intake of “good” stuff.
Ever read Groves’ book, “Eat Fat, Get Thin?”