December 16, 2010, 10:30 am — Updated: 4:28 pm -->
Freakonomics Radio: Do More Expensive Wines Taste Better?
By STEPHEN J. DUBNER
The latest Freakonomics Radio podcast is called “Do More Expensive Wines Taste Better?” (You can download/subscribe at iTunes, get the RSS feed or listen live via the link in box at right.)
When you take a sip of Cabernet, what are you tasting? The grape? The tannins? The oak barrel? Or the price?
Believe it or not, the most dominant flavor may be the dollars. Thanks to the work of some intrepid and wine-obsessed economists (yes, there is an American Association of Wine Economists), we are starting to gain a new understanding of the relationship between wine, critics and consumers.
One of these researchers is Robin Goldstein, whose paper detailing more than 6,000 blind tastings reaches the conclusion that “individuals who are unaware of the price do not derive more enjoyment from more expensive wine.”
So why do we pay so much attention to critics and connoisseurs who tell us otherwise?
That’s the question we set out to answer in this podcast. Along the way, you’ll hear details about Goldstein’s research as well as the story of how his “restaurant” in Milan, Osteria L’Intrepido, won an Award of Excellence from Wine Spectator magazine. (Not how you think!)
Also featured: Steve Levitt, who admits his palate is “underdeveloped,” describing a wine-tasting stunt he pulled on his elders at Harvard’s Society of Fellows.
Also, you’ll hear from wine broker Brian DiMarco (featured in the forthcoming documentary Escaping Robert Parker) who pulled a stunt of his own on his very wine-savvy employees. DiMarco also walks us through the mechanics of the wine-purchase business, and describes how price is often a far-too-powerful signal to our taste buds.
A couple of very interesting interviews didn’t make the podcast but are worth a mention here. One was with the noted Princeton economist (and wine buff) Orley Ashenfelter*, who spoke about our general overreliance on experts, whether they’re in the wine field or far beyond:
I mean, S&P, Moody’s, Fitch, these people all rated securities that apparently completely tanked. So there’s obviously something in the demand for expertise, the imprimatur, which is not really about the fact that they do a good job. By the way, those organizations are not transparent either, just as the Wine Spectator isn’t. So there’s some similarity here that I think probably gives us a little insight into things that are much broader than wine and food.
The other interview was with George Taber, author of the fascinating book Judgment of Paris: California vs. France and the Historic 1976 Paris Tasting That Revolutionized Wine. He recalled the moment he realized that even the most sophisticated wine experts can have feet of clay:
And there was just one classic moment when one of the French judges by the name of Raymond Oliver, who was the owner of the Le Grand Vefour restaurant, he had a television show on food in France, he was a big thing in French wine and food circles. He had a white wine in front of him. He looked at the white wine, then he held it up to a light to look at the color very closely. Then he took a sip of it. Then he held it up again. Then he said in French, ‘Ah, back to France.’ And I looked down at my scorecard and he’d just tasted the 1972 Freemark Abbey Chardonnay.
Wishing you the happiest of holiday seasons, and urging you to spend $15 instead of $50 on your next bottle of wine. Go ahead, take the money you save and blow it on the lottery.
* You can hear Ashenfelter in a related Marketplace piece that aired recently.
Stephen J. Dubner is an author and journalist who lives in New York City. Follow @freakonomics on Twitter.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
15/12 In France, Civil Unions Gain Favor Over Marriage
By SCOTT SAYARE and MAÏA DE LA BAUME
Published: December 15, 2010
PARIS — Some are divorced and disenchanted with marriage; others are young couples ideologically opposed to marriage, but eager to lighten their tax burdens. Many are lovers not quite ready for old-fashioned matrimony.
When France created its system of civil unions in 1999, it was heralded as a revolution in gay rights, a relationship almost like marriage, but not quite. No one, though, anticipated how many couples would make use of the new law. Nor was it predicted that by 2009, the overwhelming majority of civil unions would be between straight couples.
It remains unclear whether the idea of a civil union, called a pacte civil de solidarité, or PACS, has responded to a shift in social attitudes or caused one. But it has proved remarkably well suited to France and its particularities about marriage, divorce, religion and taxes — and it can be dissolved with just a registered letter.
“We’re the generation of divorced parents,” explained Maud Hugot, 32, an aide at the Health Ministry who signed a PACS with her girlfriend, Nathalie Mondot, 33, this year. Expressing a view that researchers say is becoming commonplace among same-sex couples and heterosexuals alike, she added, “The notion of eternal marriage has grown obsolete.”
France recognizes only “citizens,” and the country’s legal principles hold that special rights should not be accorded to particular groups or ethnicities. So civil unions, which confer most of the tax benefits and legal protections of marriage, were made available to everyone. (Marriage, on the other hand, remains restricted to heterosexuals.) But the attractiveness of civil unions to heterosexual couples was evident from the start. In 2000, just one year after the passage of the law, more than 75 percent of civil unions were signed between heterosexual couples. That trend has only strengthened since then: of the 173,045 civil unions signed in 2009, 95 percent were between heterosexual couples.
“It’s becoming more and more commonplace,” said Laura Anicet, 24, a student who signed a PACS last month with her 29-year-old boyfriend, Cyril Reich. “For me, before, the PACS was for homosexual couples.”
As with traditional marriages, civil unions allow couples to file joint tax returns, exempt spouses from inheritance taxes, permit partners to share insurance policies, ease access to residency permits for foreigners and make partners responsible for each other’s debts. Concluding a civil union requires little more than a single appearance before a judicial official, and ending one is even easier.
It long ago became common here to speak of “getting PACSed” (se pacser, in French). More recently, wedding fairs have been renamed to include the PACS, department stores now offer PACS gift registries and travel agencies offer PACS honeymoon packages.
Even the Roman Catholic Church, which initially condemned the partnerships as a threat to the institution of marriage, has relented; the National Confederation of Catholic Family Associations now says civil unions do not pose “a real threat.”
While the partnerships have exploded in popularity, marriage numbers have continued a long decline in France, as across Europe. Just 250,000 French couples married in 2009, with fewer than four marriages per 1,000 residents; in 1970, almost 400,000 French couples wed.
Germany, too, has seen a similar plunge in marriage rates. In 2009, there were just over four marriages per 1,000 residents compared with more than seven per 1,000 in 1970. In the United States, the current rate is 6.8 per 1,000 residents, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
France is not the only European nation to allow civil unions between straight couples, but in the few countries that do — Luxembourg, Andorra, the Netherlands — they are not as popular. In the Netherlands in 2009, for example, there was just one civil union for every eight marriages.
If current trends continue in France, new civil unions could soon outnumber marriages, as they already do in Paris’s youthful 11th Arrondissement.
François Lambert, 28, and his girlfriend, Maud Moulin, 27, signed a civil union in 2007 for what he described as logistical reasons. Both public schoolteachers, they would be assured of postings to the same district only if they filed joint tax returns, which civil unions allow.
“We didn’t have time to prepare for a marriage,” he said. “It was a question of speed.”
Sophie Lazzaro, 48, an event planner in Paris, signed a civil union in 2006 with her longtime companion, Thierry Galissant, who is 50. (She said she was drawn to a civil union largely for the legal protections and stability it offered.)
“I have two daughters, and if something happens to me, I want us to stay together as a family,” she said. “But without getting married.”
In addition to their practical advantages, she said, civil unions are ideologically suited to her generation, which came of age after the social rebellions of the 1960s. “We were very free,” she said. “AIDS didn’t exist, we had the pill, we didn’t have to fight. We were the first generation to enjoy all of this.” She added, “Marriage has a side that’s very institutional and very square and religious, which didn’t fit for us.”
Though French marriages are officially concluded in civil ceremonies held in town halls, not in churches, marriage is still viewed here as a “heavy and invasive” institution with deep ties to Christianity, said Wilfried Rault, a sociologist at the National Institute for Demographic Studies.
“Marriage bears the traces of a religious imprint,” he said, often anathema in a country where secularism has long been treated as a sacred principle. “It’s really an ideological slant, saying, ‘No one is going to tell me what I have to do.’ ”
For some, civil unions are simply a form of premarital engagement. Ms. Anicet, the student, said she and her boyfriend would probably be married were they not of different religions. She is Catholic, he is Jewish, and his mother disapproves of marrying outside the faith, Ms. Anicet said.
“We’re realizing that this is a test,” she said, “a way to get our families used to it.”
Though the two had considered a civil union for tax reasons, now “it’s a jumping-off point to getting married, later,” she said, adding after a pause, “I hope.”
Published: December 15, 2010
PARIS — Some are divorced and disenchanted with marriage; others are young couples ideologically opposed to marriage, but eager to lighten their tax burdens. Many are lovers not quite ready for old-fashioned matrimony.
Enlarge This ImageWhatever their reasons, and they vary widely, French couples are increasingly shunning traditional marriages and opting instead for civil unions, to the point that there are now two civil unions for every three marriages.
William Daniels for The New York Times
A pact is enough: Sophie Lazzaro and Thierry Galissant.
Related
Times Topics: Same-Sex
Marriage, Civil Unions, and Domestic Partnerships Marriages France
Readers' Comments
Readers shared their thoughts on this article.
Read All Comments (150) »
When France created its system of civil unions in 1999, it was heralded as a revolution in gay rights, a relationship almost like marriage, but not quite. No one, though, anticipated how many couples would make use of the new law. Nor was it predicted that by 2009, the overwhelming majority of civil unions would be between straight couples.
It remains unclear whether the idea of a civil union, called a pacte civil de solidarité, or PACS, has responded to a shift in social attitudes or caused one. But it has proved remarkably well suited to France and its particularities about marriage, divorce, religion and taxes — and it can be dissolved with just a registered letter.
“We’re the generation of divorced parents,” explained Maud Hugot, 32, an aide at the Health Ministry who signed a PACS with her girlfriend, Nathalie Mondot, 33, this year. Expressing a view that researchers say is becoming commonplace among same-sex couples and heterosexuals alike, she added, “The notion of eternal marriage has grown obsolete.”
France recognizes only “citizens,” and the country’s legal principles hold that special rights should not be accorded to particular groups or ethnicities. So civil unions, which confer most of the tax benefits and legal protections of marriage, were made available to everyone. (Marriage, on the other hand, remains restricted to heterosexuals.) But the attractiveness of civil unions to heterosexual couples was evident from the start. In 2000, just one year after the passage of the law, more than 75 percent of civil unions were signed between heterosexual couples. That trend has only strengthened since then: of the 173,045 civil unions signed in 2009, 95 percent were between heterosexual couples.
“It’s becoming more and more commonplace,” said Laura Anicet, 24, a student who signed a PACS last month with her 29-year-old boyfriend, Cyril Reich. “For me, before, the PACS was for homosexual couples.”
As with traditional marriages, civil unions allow couples to file joint tax returns, exempt spouses from inheritance taxes, permit partners to share insurance policies, ease access to residency permits for foreigners and make partners responsible for each other’s debts. Concluding a civil union requires little more than a single appearance before a judicial official, and ending one is even easier.
It long ago became common here to speak of “getting PACSed” (se pacser, in French). More recently, wedding fairs have been renamed to include the PACS, department stores now offer PACS gift registries and travel agencies offer PACS honeymoon packages.
Even the Roman Catholic Church, which initially condemned the partnerships as a threat to the institution of marriage, has relented; the National Confederation of Catholic Family Associations now says civil unions do not pose “a real threat.”
While the partnerships have exploded in popularity, marriage numbers have continued a long decline in France, as across Europe. Just 250,000 French couples married in 2009, with fewer than four marriages per 1,000 residents; in 1970, almost 400,000 French couples wed.
Germany, too, has seen a similar plunge in marriage rates. In 2009, there were just over four marriages per 1,000 residents compared with more than seven per 1,000 in 1970. In the United States, the current rate is 6.8 per 1,000 residents, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
France is not the only European nation to allow civil unions between straight couples, but in the few countries that do — Luxembourg, Andorra, the Netherlands — they are not as popular. In the Netherlands in 2009, for example, there was just one civil union for every eight marriages.
If current trends continue in France, new civil unions could soon outnumber marriages, as they already do in Paris’s youthful 11th Arrondissement.
François Lambert, 28, and his girlfriend, Maud Moulin, 27, signed a civil union in 2007 for what he described as logistical reasons. Both public schoolteachers, they would be assured of postings to the same district only if they filed joint tax returns, which civil unions allow.
“We didn’t have time to prepare for a marriage,” he said. “It was a question of speed.”
Sophie Lazzaro, 48, an event planner in Paris, signed a civil union in 2006 with her longtime companion, Thierry Galissant, who is 50. (She said she was drawn to a civil union largely for the legal protections and stability it offered.)
“I have two daughters, and if something happens to me, I want us to stay together as a family,” she said. “But without getting married.”
In addition to their practical advantages, she said, civil unions are ideologically suited to her generation, which came of age after the social rebellions of the 1960s. “We were very free,” she said. “AIDS didn’t exist, we had the pill, we didn’t have to fight. We were the first generation to enjoy all of this.” She added, “Marriage has a side that’s very institutional and very square and religious, which didn’t fit for us.”
Though French marriages are officially concluded in civil ceremonies held in town halls, not in churches, marriage is still viewed here as a “heavy and invasive” institution with deep ties to Christianity, said Wilfried Rault, a sociologist at the National Institute for Demographic Studies.
“Marriage bears the traces of a religious imprint,” he said, often anathema in a country where secularism has long been treated as a sacred principle. “It’s really an ideological slant, saying, ‘No one is going to tell me what I have to do.’ ”
For some, civil unions are simply a form of premarital engagement. Ms. Anicet, the student, said she and her boyfriend would probably be married were they not of different religions. She is Catholic, he is Jewish, and his mother disapproves of marrying outside the faith, Ms. Anicet said.
“We’re realizing that this is a test,” she said, “a way to get our families used to it.”
Though the two had considered a civil union for tax reasons, now “it’s a jumping-off point to getting married, later,” she said, adding after a pause, “I hope.”
15/12 Phys Ed: The Benefits of Exercising Before Breakfast
December 15, 2010, 12:01 am — Updated: 2:08 pm -->
Phys Ed: The Benefits of Exercising Before Breakfast
By GRETCHEN REYNOLDS
The holiday season brings many joys and, unfortunately, many countervailing dietary pitfalls. Even the fittest and most disciplined of us can succumb, indulging in more fat and calories than at any other time of the year. The health consequences, if the behavior is unchecked, can be swift and worrying. A recent study by scientists in Australia found that after only three days, an extremely high-fat, high-calorie diet can lead to increased blood sugar and insulin resistance, potentially increasing the risk for Type 2 diabetes. Waistlines also can expand at this time of year, prompting self-recrimination and unrealistic New Year’s resolutions.
But a new study published in The Journal of Physiology suggests a more reliable and far simpler response. Run or bicycle before breakfast. Exercising in the morning, before eating, the study results show, seems to significantly lessen the ill effects of holiday Bacchanalias.
For the study, researchers in Belgium recruited 28 healthy, active young men and began stuffing them with a truly lousy diet, composed of 50 percent fat and 30 percent more calories, overall, than the men had been consuming. Some of the men agreed not to exercise during the experiment. The rest were assigned to one of two exercise groups. The groups’ regimens were identical and exhausting. The men worked out four times a week in the mornings, running and cycling at a strenuous intensity. Two of the sessions lasted 90 minutes, the others, an hour. All of the workouts were supervised, so the energy expenditure of the two groups was identical.
From 1 to 25 of 452 Comments
1 2 3 ... 19 Next »
1. December 15, 2010 1:11 am Link
The weight loss benefits of “exercising in a fasted state” have also been noted elsewhere in recent years.
Sometimes it’s referred to as “bonk training”. For example, from the September 2002 Bicycling magazine:
HOW TO BONK TRAIN1. Upon waking, drink 2-3 cups of coffee, up to 45 minutes before cycling. Don’t eat.2. Ride at endurance pace- 60-70% of your max heart rate, or a casual pace that doesn’t make you pant when you talk.3. Keep it up for 20-90 minutes.4. You can do this on consecutive days, but mix in at least one normal breakfast per week.5. Eat your typical breakfast as soon as the ride ends.6 . Watch the blubber ignite!!
If you’re _already_ at a good weight, “bonk training” wouldn’t be desireable for a serious amateur athlete … you generally can’t do an intense quality workout, for the purpose of building aerobic endurance, on an empty stomach.— Kirth Gersen
2. December 15, 2010 1:14 am Link
As always, a study conducted with only male participants. I wouldn’t be surprised if women’s bodies behaved very differently.— S
3. December 15, 2010 1:59 am Link
What lessons am I, a 50-something woman, supposed to take from a study that enrolled 28 healthy young men?— JenofNJ
4. December 15, 2010 2:45 am Link
I wonder if coffee would substitute for water – at least some of it. Probably not so lucky. I’m guessing 30 min might be an ol’ foggies limit anyway. Mine is 2 minutes! then I gotta rest … or die,— Chamae
5. December 15, 2010 2:55 am Link
And then, of course, there is the emotional factor.
For me at least, a pre-breakfast workout has me feeling great all day, whereas a post breakfast workout high only lasts a couple of hours.— Brian
6. December 15, 2010 3:45 am Link
But I won’t give up my morning coffee before doing my morning training.http://www.lifestyle-after50.com/coffee.html— 50PlusSam
7. December 15, 2010 5:23 am Link
**”I would recommend this,” Dr. Heilbronn concluded, “as a ways of combating Christmas…”**Lock up the presents! Guard the Roast Beast! All you Who’s down in Whoville (or at least in Adelaide environs) GRINCH ALERT!Presume the Scrooge-y Dr. H also offers freelance credit advice on coping with bulging credit card waistlines, recipes for eggnog made of fat-free, sugarless eggnog and suggests coal for all who have been either naughty OR nice.“Combating Christmas”… To the ramparts! Or at least to the track before you eat a morsel all you BAD gluttonous children.Wait! Adelaide is in Australia where Christmas arrives in the middle of summer… aka Santa in a Speedo sipping a 40 oz. can of Fosters… never mind.— St. Nickedoff
8. December 15, 2010 6:11 am Link
Interesting study. I wish the weight loss industry would pay attention. As someone who exercises primarily to keep the pounds off and not to compete in marathons, I have always exercised before breakfast with only water and have never understood why so many advice sources claim it is this awful thing to exercise on an empty stomach and suggest these high carb drinks to casual exercisers to supposedly improve our workouts. If you’re just trying to lose weight or stay in shape, it makes absolutely no sense to eat a 200 calorie energy bar before you get on the exercise bike and then drink 100 calories of gatorade during a workout in which you’ll only burn about 200-300 calories in the first place.— Kdd
9. December 15, 2010 6:33 am Link
The fasting group lost weight because they had to destroy their muscles to find energy.Not a good idea for permanent weight loss.Excellent experiment but very bad results interpretation.Dr Salomon Jakubowicz— Salomon Jakubowicz
10. December 15, 2010 6:45 am Link
This is a fascinating article! Can’t wait to read the whole thing.
Here’s what I’m thinking–if you eat late–and a lot of “party food” you probably aren’t going to be hungry first thing in the morning. So just go for exercising on an empty stomach.
Under normal circumstances–grab a light-hold-you-over breakfast before exercising. Eat more afterward.
Glad someone figured this out. Quite shocking how quickly diet adversely affects one’s body!— The Healthy L ibrarian
11. December 15, 2010 7:10 am Link
The benefits of exercising before breakfast are….. feeling nauseated and dizzy. No thanks!— S
12. December 15, 2010 7:14 am Link
The holidays can be such a joyful time of year, but all the excess calories, alcohol, stress, and increased demand on our bodies can cause us to suffer unexpected holiday effects, like insulin resistance and also heart attack. See ‘Avoiding Holiday Heart Attacks’ on my blog at http://www.ladywiththepants.com and find some simple ways to protect yourself and your family this holiday season.— Theresa Ayala
13. December 15, 2010 7:29 am Link
As a long time runner I have found that when I run before breakfast I actually feel stronger during my run. After a glass of water I am out the door, but it does take a bit of getting used to.— Tony
14. December 15, 2010 7:52 am Link
I have lost 10 pounds since May with eliminating breakfast and eating standard healthy lunches and dinners of high fiber, low sodium. I had read of similar study last spring.— gallega
15. December 15, 2010 8:06 am Link
I usually can’t stomach food until after 9am anyway, so working out on a glass of OJ, some coffee and maybe a banana first thing in the morning is normal for me. Good to know that aside from starting my day well oxygenated and warmed up might also benefit me in this other way.— Morgans
16. December 15, 2010 8:24 am Link
Does anyone know how researchers determine that undigested fats, as opposed to carbs, are being burned during exercise?
For years I’ve read claims about ‘the fat-burning zone’ — in which a higher percentage of fat is burned during cardio, but I’ve never seen any published description of the methodology, and have no idea whether it is fact or health myth.
How does one know whether the burned fat came from stored body fat, or simply undigested fats from food?— Sequel
17. December 15, 2010 8:35 am Link
The other benefit of committing to exercising before breakfast is that a person is more likely to do it. If I postpone my run until the middle or end of the day, I am likely to come up with some excuse to skip it. I try to roll out of bed and head out the door before I can think of a reason not to, and that has worked for years.— Kris
18. December 15, 2010 8:38 am Link
I would like to see a study that is comprised of women. Some researchers are finally starting to understand that studies done on young relatively healthy males do not truly apply to women.— Lisa
19. December 15, 2010 8:44 am Link
Wow! These findings really point out how our bodies behave when it comes to food. And yet, for some cultural reason our breakfasts are usually one of the worst meals of the day loaded with fats and sugars. Pancakes and eggs, anyone? The institution of breakfast is leading us into obesity and I for one cannot understand WHY anyone living at home with an adequate kitchen has to go OUT for breakfast!! Add the expense and you have a formula for disaster. Now, consider the millions that leave home and MUST STOP at a fast food restaurant for breakfast on the run, or drive, to work. This study confirms the hazards of a high calorie/fat breakfast along with a sedentary job. I have a feeling that the TV show The Biggest Loser” will run for decades and will never run of candidates.— Rayman
20. December 15, 2010 8:51 am Link
How can we reach conclusions so firmly based on research conducted only 28 participants and also gain such a widespread publicity ?http://www.vegetarian-zone.com— Vegetarian
21. December 15, 2010 8:54 am Link
I always exercise before breakfast – I’m so habituated to it that I just wake up and jump on the elliptical or go out running or walking without even thinking about it. The psychological benefit is huge – you’re halfway through your work-out before you’re even awake! And you’re done for the day, which is a great feeling. So even if it didn’t have the physical effects described above, I’d still recommend it!— Nancy
22. December 15, 2010 8:56 am Link
Vigorous exercise BEFORE meals (if not an empty stomach) seems just common sense — unless you like the taste of vomit in your mouth. [And who DOESN'T?]I’m sure glad somebody got those wacky Belgians to go all human guinea pig for a project to discover something perfectly obvious.Imagine the joy of the “‘twerps” either pigging out in the AM and then twiddling their Elvish thumbs — OR then tearing about for 90 minutes of soul-crushing exercise. I hope they were well remunerated, or at least given a “fancy” sample of delicious Belgian chocolates for their efforts.Of course running, weight lifting, swimming or whatever morning workout you choose done on an empty stomach. (Uh, going without “breakfast” isn’t much of an option for those who like to work out late.)There is all the business about carbo-loading for endurance fuel, but if you are trying to cut down on calories to lose a few lbs through exercise it doesn’t make much sense to guzzle hundreds of calories in sugary sports drinks while you are shedding only a few dozen calories with a brisk morning run. Thirsty? I have one word for you: water.Keep in mind that I am NOT what you call a “breakfast person” unless I find a Denny’s open off the freeway in Riverside while I’m driving through on vacation. My first meal is normally around 2-ish. Yeah, I know breakfast is the most important meal of the blah-blah-blah. Okay, then I have my “breakfast” about 2. Now are you happy?Here’s a concept that even a Belgian waffle can comprehend: Work out vigorously, then eat sensibly.— Ringdem Belgians
23. December 15, 2010 9:07 am Link
I wish I hadn’t read this one … I typically do exercise in the morning on an empty stomach – that’s the most time efficient for me and also generally when I feel best. However, I injured my ankle and can’t do anything but some laying down Pilates / sit ups right now … so I just further depressed myself and am missing my morning workouts even MORE now …The message of importance of exercise always bombards me – I LOVE to exercise and can always find a way to work it into schedule (even with a 1 yr old and a full time job), but, alas, injuries rather than desire often keep me away from it.— kfb
24. December 15, 2010 9:13 am Link
To be clear, I just read the study and the “high-fat diet” was also a high-carb diet – 50% of the calories came from fat, 40% of the calories came from carb and 10% came from protein. Of the four diets that the participants were given (3000, 3500, 4000, 4500 calories), the lowest calorie diet (3000) alone had 167 grams of fat and 300 grams of carb, an extraordinary amount of both!
Just wanted to clarify that the effect was probably not due to the fat alone and that 300 grams of carbohydrate is just, wow, an incredible amount that will surely make anyone’s blood glucose skyrocket.
Is it just me, or is the study also vague about what type of breakfast the fasting group received? Did they receive the high-carb breakfast as well?— FoodieRD
25. December 15, 2010 9:18 am Link
The results of this new study are astounding. It’s sure to unnerve the Oprah and Dr. Phil watching masses.
“But a new study published in The Journal of Physiology suggests a more reliable and far simpler response. Run or bicycle before breakfast.”
“…the non-exercising group was, to no one’s surprise, super-sized, having packed on an average of more than six pounds.”
“Only the group that exercised before breakfast gained almost no weight”
“Our current data,” the study’s authors wrote, “indicate that exercise training in the fasted state is more effective than exercise in the carbohydrate-fed state”
…“exercising in a fasted state (usually possible only before breakfast), coaxes the body to burn a greater percentage of fat for fuel during vigorous exercise, instead of relying primarily on carbohydrates.”
“In other words, working out before breakfast directly combated the two most detrimental effects of eating a high-fat, high-calorie diet. It also helped the men avoid gaining weight.”
Who would have ever even entertained such radical and ground-breaking theories. Maybe a blaspheming maverick like Jack LaLanne who was practically born in the 19th century? (“At the age of 96, LaLanne continues to work out every morning for two hours. He spends 1½ hours in the weight room and half an hour swimming or walking.”)
Good old, old Jack. But…what did he know.
I’ve hear that a new study is underway in one of those radical universities in California. They’re theorizing that the earth isn’t flat. Imagine that.— RC
Related Posts
From Well
Phys Ed: The Benefits of Weight Training for Children
Phys Ed: Will Training in the Heat Improve Your Performance in the Cold?
Phys Ed: What Exercise Science Doesn’t Know About Women
Phys Ed: How to Overcome Fear on the Slopes
Phys Ed: How Exercising Keeps Your Cells Young
Phys Ed: The Benefits of Exercising Before Breakfast
By GRETCHEN REYNOLDS
The holiday season brings many joys and, unfortunately, many countervailing dietary pitfalls. Even the fittest and most disciplined of us can succumb, indulging in more fat and calories than at any other time of the year. The health consequences, if the behavior is unchecked, can be swift and worrying. A recent study by scientists in Australia found that after only three days, an extremely high-fat, high-calorie diet can lead to increased blood sugar and insulin resistance, potentially increasing the risk for Type 2 diabetes. Waistlines also can expand at this time of year, prompting self-recrimination and unrealistic New Year’s resolutions.
But a new study published in The Journal of Physiology suggests a more reliable and far simpler response. Run or bicycle before breakfast. Exercising in the morning, before eating, the study results show, seems to significantly lessen the ill effects of holiday Bacchanalias.
For the study, researchers in Belgium recruited 28 healthy, active young men and began stuffing them with a truly lousy diet, composed of 50 percent fat and 30 percent more calories, overall, than the men had been consuming. Some of the men agreed not to exercise during the experiment. The rest were assigned to one of two exercise groups. The groups’ regimens were identical and exhausting. The men worked out four times a week in the mornings, running and cycling at a strenuous intensity. Two of the sessions lasted 90 minutes, the others, an hour. All of the workouts were supervised, so the energy expenditure of the two groups was identical.
Related
More Phys Ed columns
Faster, Higher, Stronger
Fitness and Nutrition News
Their early-morning routines, however, were not. One of the groups ate a hefty, carbohydrate-rich breakfast before exercising and continued to ingest carbohydrates, in the form of something like a sports drink, throughout their workouts. The second group worked out without eating first and drank only water during the training. They made up for their abstinence with breakfast later that morning, comparable in calories to the other group’s trencherman portions.
The experiment lasted for six weeks. At the end, the nonexercising group was, to no one’s surprise, super-sized, having packed on an average of more than six pounds. They had also developed insulin resistance — their muscles were no longer responding well to insulin and weren’t pulling sugar (or, more technically, glucose) out of the bloodstream efficiently — and they had begun storing extra fat within and between their muscle cells. Both insulin resistance and fat-marbled muscles are metabolically unhealthy conditions that can be precursors of diabetes.
The men who ate breakfast before exercising gained weight, too, although only about half as much as the control group. Like those sedentary big eaters, however, they had become more insulin-resistant and were storing a greater amount of fat in their muscles.
Only the group that exercised before breakfast gained almost no weight and showed no signs of insulin resistance. They also burned the fat they were taking in more efficiently. “Our current data,” the study’s authors wrote, “indicate that exercise training in the fasted state is more effective than exercise in the carbohydrate-fed state to stimulate glucose tolerance despite a hypercaloric high-fat diet.”
Just how exercising before breakfast blunts the deleterious effects of overindulging is not completely understood, although this study points toward several intriguing explanations. For one, as has been known for some time, exercising in a fasted state (usually possible only before breakfast), coaxes the body to burn a greater percentage of fat for fuel during vigorous exercise, instead of relying primarily on carbohydrates. When you burn fat, you obviously don’t store it in your muscles. In “our study, only the fasted group demonstrated beneficial metabolic adaptations, which eventually may enhance oxidative fatty acid turnover,” said Peter Hespel, Ph.D., a professor in the Research Center for Exercise and Health at Catholic University Leuven in Belgium and senior author of the study.
At the same time, the fasting group showed increased levels of a muscle protein that “is responsible for insulin-stimulated glucose transport in muscle and thus plays a pivotal role in regulation of insulin sensitivity,” Dr Hespel said.
In other words, working out before breakfast directly combated the two most detrimental effects of eating a high-fat, high-calorie diet. It also helped the men avoid gaining weight.
There are caveats, of course. Exercising on an empty stomach is unlikely to improve your performance during that workout. Carbohydrates are easier for working muscles to access and burn for energy than fat, which is why athletes typically eat a high-carbohydrate diet. The researchers also don’t know whether the same benefits will accrue if you exercise at a more leisurely pace and for less time than in this study, although, according to Leonie Heilbronn, Ph.D., a professor at the University of Adelaide in Australia, who has extensively studied the effects of high-fat diets and wrote a commentary about the Belgian study, “I would predict low intensity is better than nothing.”
So, unpleasant as the prospect may be, set your alarm after the next Christmas party to wake you early enough that you can run before sitting down to breakfast. “I would recommend this,” Dr. Heilbronn concluded, “as a way of combating Christmas” and those insidiously delectable cookies.
From 1 to 25 of 452 Comments
1 2 3 ... 19 Next »
1. December 15, 2010 1:11 am Link
The weight loss benefits of “exercising in a fasted state” have also been noted elsewhere in recent years.
Sometimes it’s referred to as “bonk training”. For example, from the September 2002 Bicycling magazine:
HOW TO BONK TRAIN1. Upon waking, drink 2-3 cups of coffee, up to 45 minutes before cycling. Don’t eat.2. Ride at endurance pace- 60-70% of your max heart rate, or a casual pace that doesn’t make you pant when you talk.3. Keep it up for 20-90 minutes.4. You can do this on consecutive days, but mix in at least one normal breakfast per week.5. Eat your typical breakfast as soon as the ride ends.6 . Watch the blubber ignite!!
If you’re _already_ at a good weight, “bonk training” wouldn’t be desireable for a serious amateur athlete … you generally can’t do an intense quality workout, for the purpose of building aerobic endurance, on an empty stomach.— Kirth Gersen
2. December 15, 2010 1:14 am Link
As always, a study conducted with only male participants. I wouldn’t be surprised if women’s bodies behaved very differently.— S
3. December 15, 2010 1:59 am Link
What lessons am I, a 50-something woman, supposed to take from a study that enrolled 28 healthy young men?— JenofNJ
4. December 15, 2010 2:45 am Link
I wonder if coffee would substitute for water – at least some of it. Probably not so lucky. I’m guessing 30 min might be an ol’ foggies limit anyway. Mine is 2 minutes! then I gotta rest … or die,— Chamae
5. December 15, 2010 2:55 am Link
And then, of course, there is the emotional factor.
For me at least, a pre-breakfast workout has me feeling great all day, whereas a post breakfast workout high only lasts a couple of hours.— Brian
6. December 15, 2010 3:45 am Link
But I won’t give up my morning coffee before doing my morning training.http://www.lifestyle-after50.com/coffee.html— 50PlusSam
7. December 15, 2010 5:23 am Link
**”I would recommend this,” Dr. Heilbronn concluded, “as a ways of combating Christmas…”**Lock up the presents! Guard the Roast Beast! All you Who’s down in Whoville (or at least in Adelaide environs) GRINCH ALERT!Presume the Scrooge-y Dr. H also offers freelance credit advice on coping with bulging credit card waistlines, recipes for eggnog made of fat-free, sugarless eggnog and suggests coal for all who have been either naughty OR nice.“Combating Christmas”… To the ramparts! Or at least to the track before you eat a morsel all you BAD gluttonous children.Wait! Adelaide is in Australia where Christmas arrives in the middle of summer… aka Santa in a Speedo sipping a 40 oz. can of Fosters… never mind.— St. Nickedoff
8. December 15, 2010 6:11 am Link
Interesting study. I wish the weight loss industry would pay attention. As someone who exercises primarily to keep the pounds off and not to compete in marathons, I have always exercised before breakfast with only water and have never understood why so many advice sources claim it is this awful thing to exercise on an empty stomach and suggest these high carb drinks to casual exercisers to supposedly improve our workouts. If you’re just trying to lose weight or stay in shape, it makes absolutely no sense to eat a 200 calorie energy bar before you get on the exercise bike and then drink 100 calories of gatorade during a workout in which you’ll only burn about 200-300 calories in the first place.— Kdd
9. December 15, 2010 6:33 am Link
The fasting group lost weight because they had to destroy their muscles to find energy.Not a good idea for permanent weight loss.Excellent experiment but very bad results interpretation.Dr Salomon Jakubowicz— Salomon Jakubowicz
10. December 15, 2010 6:45 am Link
This is a fascinating article! Can’t wait to read the whole thing.
Here’s what I’m thinking–if you eat late–and a lot of “party food” you probably aren’t going to be hungry first thing in the morning. So just go for exercising on an empty stomach.
Under normal circumstances–grab a light-hold-you-over breakfast before exercising. Eat more afterward.
Glad someone figured this out. Quite shocking how quickly diet adversely affects one’s body!— The Healthy L ibrarian
11. December 15, 2010 7:10 am Link
The benefits of exercising before breakfast are….. feeling nauseated and dizzy. No thanks!— S
12. December 15, 2010 7:14 am Link
The holidays can be such a joyful time of year, but all the excess calories, alcohol, stress, and increased demand on our bodies can cause us to suffer unexpected holiday effects, like insulin resistance and also heart attack. See ‘Avoiding Holiday Heart Attacks’ on my blog at http://www.ladywiththepants.com and find some simple ways to protect yourself and your family this holiday season.— Theresa Ayala
13. December 15, 2010 7:29 am Link
As a long time runner I have found that when I run before breakfast I actually feel stronger during my run. After a glass of water I am out the door, but it does take a bit of getting used to.— Tony
14. December 15, 2010 7:52 am Link
I have lost 10 pounds since May with eliminating breakfast and eating standard healthy lunches and dinners of high fiber, low sodium. I had read of similar study last spring.— gallega
15. December 15, 2010 8:06 am Link
I usually can’t stomach food until after 9am anyway, so working out on a glass of OJ, some coffee and maybe a banana first thing in the morning is normal for me. Good to know that aside from starting my day well oxygenated and warmed up might also benefit me in this other way.— Morgans
16. December 15, 2010 8:24 am Link
Does anyone know how researchers determine that undigested fats, as opposed to carbs, are being burned during exercise?
For years I’ve read claims about ‘the fat-burning zone’ — in which a higher percentage of fat is burned during cardio, but I’ve never seen any published description of the methodology, and have no idea whether it is fact or health myth.
How does one know whether the burned fat came from stored body fat, or simply undigested fats from food?— Sequel
17. December 15, 2010 8:35 am Link
The other benefit of committing to exercising before breakfast is that a person is more likely to do it. If I postpone my run until the middle or end of the day, I am likely to come up with some excuse to skip it. I try to roll out of bed and head out the door before I can think of a reason not to, and that has worked for years.— Kris
18. December 15, 2010 8:38 am Link
I would like to see a study that is comprised of women. Some researchers are finally starting to understand that studies done on young relatively healthy males do not truly apply to women.— Lisa
19. December 15, 2010 8:44 am Link
Wow! These findings really point out how our bodies behave when it comes to food. And yet, for some cultural reason our breakfasts are usually one of the worst meals of the day loaded with fats and sugars. Pancakes and eggs, anyone? The institution of breakfast is leading us into obesity and I for one cannot understand WHY anyone living at home with an adequate kitchen has to go OUT for breakfast!! Add the expense and you have a formula for disaster. Now, consider the millions that leave home and MUST STOP at a fast food restaurant for breakfast on the run, or drive, to work. This study confirms the hazards of a high calorie/fat breakfast along with a sedentary job. I have a feeling that the TV show The Biggest Loser” will run for decades and will never run of candidates.— Rayman
20. December 15, 2010 8:51 am Link
How can we reach conclusions so firmly based on research conducted only 28 participants and also gain such a widespread publicity ?http://www.vegetarian-zone.com— Vegetarian
21. December 15, 2010 8:54 am Link
I always exercise before breakfast – I’m so habituated to it that I just wake up and jump on the elliptical or go out running or walking without even thinking about it. The psychological benefit is huge – you’re halfway through your work-out before you’re even awake! And you’re done for the day, which is a great feeling. So even if it didn’t have the physical effects described above, I’d still recommend it!— Nancy
22. December 15, 2010 8:56 am Link
Vigorous exercise BEFORE meals (if not an empty stomach) seems just common sense — unless you like the taste of vomit in your mouth. [And who DOESN'T?]I’m sure glad somebody got those wacky Belgians to go all human guinea pig for a project to discover something perfectly obvious.Imagine the joy of the “‘twerps” either pigging out in the AM and then twiddling their Elvish thumbs — OR then tearing about for 90 minutes of soul-crushing exercise. I hope they were well remunerated, or at least given a “fancy” sample of delicious Belgian chocolates for their efforts.Of course running, weight lifting, swimming or whatever morning workout you choose done on an empty stomach. (Uh, going without “breakfast” isn’t much of an option for those who like to work out late.)There is all the business about carbo-loading for endurance fuel, but if you are trying to cut down on calories to lose a few lbs through exercise it doesn’t make much sense to guzzle hundreds of calories in sugary sports drinks while you are shedding only a few dozen calories with a brisk morning run. Thirsty? I have one word for you: water.Keep in mind that I am NOT what you call a “breakfast person” unless I find a Denny’s open off the freeway in Riverside while I’m driving through on vacation. My first meal is normally around 2-ish. Yeah, I know breakfast is the most important meal of the blah-blah-blah. Okay, then I have my “breakfast” about 2. Now are you happy?Here’s a concept that even a Belgian waffle can comprehend: Work out vigorously, then eat sensibly.— Ringdem Belgians
23. December 15, 2010 9:07 am Link
I wish I hadn’t read this one … I typically do exercise in the morning on an empty stomach – that’s the most time efficient for me and also generally when I feel best. However, I injured my ankle and can’t do anything but some laying down Pilates / sit ups right now … so I just further depressed myself and am missing my morning workouts even MORE now …The message of importance of exercise always bombards me – I LOVE to exercise and can always find a way to work it into schedule (even with a 1 yr old and a full time job), but, alas, injuries rather than desire often keep me away from it.— kfb
24. December 15, 2010 9:13 am Link
To be clear, I just read the study and the “high-fat diet” was also a high-carb diet – 50% of the calories came from fat, 40% of the calories came from carb and 10% came from protein. Of the four diets that the participants were given (3000, 3500, 4000, 4500 calories), the lowest calorie diet (3000) alone had 167 grams of fat and 300 grams of carb, an extraordinary amount of both!
Just wanted to clarify that the effect was probably not due to the fat alone and that 300 grams of carbohydrate is just, wow, an incredible amount that will surely make anyone’s blood glucose skyrocket.
Is it just me, or is the study also vague about what type of breakfast the fasting group received? Did they receive the high-carb breakfast as well?— FoodieRD
25. December 15, 2010 9:18 am Link
The results of this new study are astounding. It’s sure to unnerve the Oprah and Dr. Phil watching masses.
“But a new study published in The Journal of Physiology suggests a more reliable and far simpler response. Run or bicycle before breakfast.”
“…the non-exercising group was, to no one’s surprise, super-sized, having packed on an average of more than six pounds.”
“Only the group that exercised before breakfast gained almost no weight”
“Our current data,” the study’s authors wrote, “indicate that exercise training in the fasted state is more effective than exercise in the carbohydrate-fed state”
…“exercising in a fasted state (usually possible only before breakfast), coaxes the body to burn a greater percentage of fat for fuel during vigorous exercise, instead of relying primarily on carbohydrates.”
“In other words, working out before breakfast directly combated the two most detrimental effects of eating a high-fat, high-calorie diet. It also helped the men avoid gaining weight.”
Who would have ever even entertained such radical and ground-breaking theories. Maybe a blaspheming maverick like Jack LaLanne who was practically born in the 19th century? (“At the age of 96, LaLanne continues to work out every morning for two hours. He spends 1½ hours in the weight room and half an hour swimming or walking.”)
Good old, old Jack. But…what did he know.
I’ve hear that a new study is underway in one of those radical universities in California. They’re theorizing that the earth isn’t flat. Imagine that.— RC
Related Posts
From Well
Phys Ed: The Benefits of Weight Training for Children
Phys Ed: Will Training in the Heat Improve Your Performance in the Cold?
Phys Ed: What Exercise Science Doesn’t Know About Women
Phys Ed: How to Overcome Fear on the Slopes
Phys Ed: How Exercising Keeps Your Cells Young
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)