Your Ad Here

This Works BETTER Than Protein to Build Muscle!

Every serious lifter looking to build muscle and burn fat has a tub-??o-??protein in their pantry, right?

(Arguably) you're not really "serious" if you don't, right?

But there's an old school supplement that works even BETTER than your fanciest-??schmanciest protein powder…

…and it's one of my "must have's" for maximizing your gains!

The Muscle Building Supplement That Works Even BETTER Than Protein!

First of all, there's nothing really "new" about this supplement. It's been around since the days Ahnold was lifting down at Venice Beach.

But the real question is…

…are YOU using it right now?

I'm talking about Branched Chain Amino Acids (or BCAA's).

Branched chain amino acids are essentially "broken down" protein and they're what I call the "crack cocaine" of supplements.

Do you have a bag? You should!

Here's why…

A recent study at Charleston College (South Carolina) studied 36 "experienced" lifters and randomly assigned them to one of 3 groups:

Group 1: Consumed 14 grams of BCAA's during workouts
Group 2: Consumed 28 grams of whey protein during workouts
Group 3: Consumed 28 grams of carbohydrates (sports drink) during workouts

All of their workouts and diets were standardized to keep the playing field even, but at the end of the the 8 week trial, the results were NOT even!

The group taking the BCAA's ended up burning more fat, adding more muscle, and gaining more strength than those using either only the whey protein or the carbs.

What You Need To Do…

I'm not saying ditch the whey protein. DON'T!

BUT…you definitely should be consuming some straight up BCAA's on a daily basis if you're trying to build muscle and burn fat.

Now a word of warning here…

Do NOT go down to your local supplement store and buy a bottle of BCAA tablets (the most common way they're sold).

You'll end up spending a fortune on them and they'll be gone in a matter of a week or so.

Instead, buy your BCAA's as a POWDER in bulk. It's waaaaaay cheaper and will last you a long, long time.

Also, to increase your savings, you don't need to use as much as the study did because I still recommend that you consume some whey protein isolate AFTER your workout.

Just add about 5–10 grams to your workout drink (or use my full "During Workout Power Potion" from http://?www?.MakeYourOwnSupplements?.com) and you'll experience greater amino acid uptake to build more muscle.

Tags: featured muscle building muscle growth protein supplements

 

Jeff Anderson is a 10 year veteran of the U.S. Army, a Master Fitness Trainer, and Master Instructor of Close Quarters Combat self defense. A full time fitness and self defense author, Jeff has trained thousands of men and women in the practical application of advanced military fitness methods as well as close combat tactics for "real life" self defense.

 

Chiarelli Mental Wounds 'No Phantom Issue

The "signature wounds of this war" are post traumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury, said Gen. Peter Chiarelli, vice chief of staff of the Army.

Speaking at the Association of the United States Army Annual Meeting and Exposition Tuesday, Chiarelli addressed a forum on Health Promotion, Risk Reduction and Suicide Prevention.

"I want to change the stigma linked to these wounds," Chiarelli said about PTSD and TBI. "They are in fact real. These are not phantom issues made up by weak Soldiers. They are as real as if you fell and broke your leg or lost an arm."

Cases of PTSD and TBI have grown from 38 percent to 52 percent since August 2008 among Soldiers involved in incidents in Iraq or Afghanistan.

The Army has seen a significant increase in the number of Soldiers suffering from these conditions since 2006 when there were 102 confirmed suicides. In 2007, there were 115 suicides. In 2008, the Army had 143 confirmed suicides.

About 30 percent of Soliders sent downrange will have some form of post traumatic stress disorder, Chiarelli said.

He said it is also important for senior leaders to be aware of the importance of dealing with these issues head on, and that it is senior leaders whom Soldiers turn to for positive influence.

"Leaders need to be careful on the tone they use with this issue," Chiarelli said. "It affects how their subordinates view these conditions and if you believe anxiety and depression are signs of weakness, so will they."

 

Crank Up The Volume On Your Training

The number of sets and reps you do in a workout is referred to as the "volume". If you're training with too low of a volume, your body won't need to adapt, but then again, if it's too high, you risk overtraining and actually losing muscle mass.

The following is a breakdown of recommended sets and reps, depending on what you're after. It's also a good idea to switch up your workouts every few months or so, to incorporate muscle confusion into your muscle building strategies, so switching between them is a great idea to keep your workouts fresh.

Muscle Gain: Generally, a moderate number of sets and reps per exercise lead to the quickest gains in pure size, which is what most of us are all after. Using lower reps builds strength and increases the size of proteins inside your muscle fibers, while higher reps increases the fluid inside the muscle itself.

For maximum size, you'll need to take advantage of both adaptations. Generally speaking, between 3-6 sets of 6-12 reps per exercise tends to work best. A good pyramid to follow is: 12, 10, 8, 6. That is, 12 reps, followed by a set of 10, 8, 6 and then finally 4.

Fat Loss: Although their are many ways to design a fat-loss program, the volume in your lifting workouts can be altered to help achieve some additional weight loss.The number of sets and reps can be made high to burn lots of calories or low to maintain muscle mass while cutting calories from your diet.

Sets are usually kept lower then 4 or fewer per exercise. In fact, performing a circuit of several exercises in-a-row, for just one or two sets is highly recommended. That way, you can train the whole body in a fast, time-efficient fat burning workout that gets your heart and muscles pumping.

Strength Gain: Using heavier weight means lower reps, which equals strength. Think power lifters one rep maxing on the clean and press. By keeping your reps low, you can perform a large number of sets (which also increases size).

Although, with more extreme loads, you won't be able to recover from multiple sets, so a lower number is more suitable. Try 3-5 sets of five reps or fewer per exercise.

All of these types of volume are great to use, and it's a good idea to switch up your strategy every-so-often, to keep gaining the most muscle mass.

 

Guardsman Sentenced to Prison for Killing Dogs

A Sacramento Superior Court judge on Thursday sentenced a Sacramento man to state prison after he pleaded guilty to kicking to death one pet dog and drowning another in a washing machine.

Judge Steve White sentenced Ramone King Jr. to two years, eight months in prison after he pleaded guilty to two counts of felony animal abuse.

The sentence against King, a National Guardsman who appeared in court in uniform on at least one occasion, was unusually harsh for someone with no prior criminal record, said prosecutor Hilary Bagley-Franzoia.

But the facts of the case were particularly disturbing, she said. "King's uncontrollable rage and extreme cruelty earned him a direct route to prison," said the prosecutor.

The city's chief animal control officer, Daniel Torres, is a former police sergeant who has been aggressively pursuing cruelty cases during his three-year tenure at the facility.

Torres said Thursday that his office has submitted 10 such cases for prosecution this year. In February, in a case based on a city animal control investigation, a judge sentenced a man with a long criminal history to eight years in prison for savagely beating an acquaintance's pet dog.

In the latest case, King was charged in the deaths of two dogs in separate incidents.

In April, according to investigators, he found a Chihuahua running loose in his south Sacramento neighborhood. After the animal bit a child in his home, King put the dog in a washing machine, turned it on and drowned the animal, prosecutors said.

The following month, King's former girlfriend called city police and animal control and said he had kicked to death her dog, a Pomeranian mix named Bailey, after it urinated in his bedroom.

King initially denied killing his neighbor's dog, and said the death of the second dog was an accident. But investigators developed evidence showing that King became upset at both animals over "petty misbehavior," said Bagley-Franzoia.

"This is a guy who bragged about putting the dog in the washing machine, turning it on and sitting on the lid," said Torres. "We feel really good that not only were we able to get evidence good enough to prosecute, we are sending him to state prison."

King likely will face discharge from the National Guard, an official said.

"The appropriate disposition would be to consider the soldier for administrative separation for commission of a serious offense," said Guard spokesman Maj. Jonathan Masaki Shiroma. That could mean loss of retirement and other Veterans Administration benefits, Shiroma said.

 

Why diets don't work Starved brain cells eat themselves, study finds

A report in the August issue of the Cell Press journal Cell Metabolism might help to explain why it's so frustratingly difficult to stick to a diet. When we don't eat, hunger-inducing neurons in the brain start eating bits of themselves. That act of self-cannibalism turns up a hunger signal to prompt eating.

"A pathway that is really important for every cell to turn over components in a kind of housekeeping process is also required to regulate appetite," said Rajat Singh of Albert Einstein College of Medicine.

The cellular process uncovered in neurons of the brain's hypothalamus is known as autophagy (literally self-eating.) Singh says the new findings in mice suggest that treatments aimed at blocking autophagy may prove useful as hunger-fighting weapons in the war against obesity.

The new evidence shows that lipids within the so-called agouti-related peptide (AgRP) neurons are mobilized following autophagy, generating free fatty acids. Those fatty acids in turn boost levels of AgRP, itself a hunger signal.

When autophagy is blocked in AgRP neurons, AgRP levels fail to rise in response to starvation, the researchers show. Meanwhile, levels of another hormone, called ?-melanocyte stimulating hormone, remain elevated. That change in body chemistry led mice to become lighter and leaner as they ate less after fasting, and burned more energy.

Autophagy is known to have an important role in other parts of the body as a way of providing energy in times of starvation. However, unlike other organs, earlier studies had shown the brain to be relatively resistant to starvation-induced autophagy.

"The present study demonstrates the unique nature of hypothalamic neurons in their ability to upregulate autophagy in response to starvation that is consistent with the roles of these neurons in feeding and energy homeostasis," the researchers wrote.

Singh said he suspects that fatty acids released into the circulation and taken up by the hypothalamus as fat stores break down between meals may induce autophagy in those AgRP neurons. Singh's research earlier showed a similar response in the liver.

On the other hand, he says, chronically high levels of fatty acids in the bloodstream, as happens in those on a high-fat diet, might alter hypothalamic lipid metabolism, "setting up a vicious cycle of overfeeding and altered energy balance." Treatments aimed at the pathway might "make you less hungry and burn more fat," a good way to maintain energy balance in a world where calories are cheap and plentiful.

The findings might also yield new insight into metabolic changes that come with age given that autophagy declines as we get older. "We already have some preliminary evidence there might be changes with age," Singh said. "We are excited about that."

 

Why do antidepressants stop working

Many of you have suffered for a long time with depression but haven't given up. Most impressively, many are trying to help others.It's common to find an antidepressant medication that works for awhile and then after some months or years, it stops working. This is extremely frustrating for you and your doctor. The truth is that we don't really understand why this happens. There are probably different reasons for different medications. Fortunately for some of you, it doesn't happen.National Suicide Prevention Lifeline
1-800-273-TALK (8255) Go to the nearest hospital or emergency roomCall your physician, health provider or clergyNational Alliance on Mental Illness
www.nami.org
1-800-950-NAMI (6264)

When you're doing well on an antidepressant, it's reasonable to ask how long you should keep taking it. Unfortunately, there's no absolutely correct answer. However, most clinicians feel that as long as the medication is having a beneficial effect, it's probably wise to keep using it. This is particularly true because some of you do well on the same medication for many years.

One of the current theories for why antidepressants stop working is that over time the genes that produce enzymes that regulate the metabolism of medications become upregulated and consequently produce more enzymes. If this is the case, it may lead to a decrease in the blood level and it may be necessary to increase the dose in order to get the same effect.

Some of you decide to stop taking antidepressants when you feel better, and then find that symptoms return. At that point, you want to begin taking the medication again. For some, the medicine once again helps, but for others it doesn't seem to have the same positive effect that it initially had.

It would be helpful if you'd share your own stories related to a particular medication losing effectiveness. The personal stories might provide some clues that could help others to better understand why a particular antidepressant medication stops working. It would be important to know the name of the medication that initially worked and what events were associated with it losing its effectiveness. While it's frustrating to have a medication lose its effectiveness, usually a replacement can be found that will once again lead to some relief of depressive symptoms.

One of you asked about being an ultrarapid metabolizer. This means that for some antidepressants it would be difficult for you to achieve an adequate blood level and therefore it would be unlikely you'd have a good clinical response at a safe dose.  However, it's important to understand that even though someone is an ultrarapid metabolizer for one type of antidepressant, it's quite possible that they could be a normal metabolizer of other antidepressants. This is a critical concept for both patients and their doctors to understand.Another question was how pharmacogenomic testing can be obtained in Canada.  It's my understanding that it's available at the major academic medical centers in Canada as they have good access to major reference laboratories which all offer pharmacogenomic testing. However, I don't believe that it's routinely paid for by the Canada's national health system. Hopefully, this will change as the benefits of testing become more widely understood.blog index

You Can't Budget Your Calories If You Don't Know The (Accurate) Costs

I remember the moments very well when I came face to face with the reality that what we are served in restaurants packs a lot more punch and paunch than many of us realize. And a couple of research papers today reminded me why this is so important.

There I was a couple of years ago, standing at a well-known fast food restaurant in LaGuardia airport after a long day of meetings, trying to find something reasonable to eat before getting on the flight home. And displayed on the sign in front of me were the calorie counts of the various choices that were available. Although several were appetizing, none (if I recall correctly, even the salad) was reasonable in terms of the calorie count. I was glad to see the calories, but dismayed at the information.

But my "light bulb moment" came when I was having dinner with some of my family at a well-known chain restaurant (which is well known for its eponymous dessert) outside of Washington DC reading the menu and finding few choices under 1000 calories-and desserts that in some instances topped a couple of thousand calories.  I was desperate and distraught, but had to cave and get something-no matter what the calorie cost was going to be.

Many of us are about to have similar experiences, as restaurant chains nationwide are going to start posting the calorie count of their menu items.  It happens to be a proven way to make people aware of what they are eating, and hopefully will begin to address our nationwide obesity epidemic (more about that later). I suspect it is going to be a rude awakening for many of us when we come face to face with the calorie cost of that burger and fries.

An article in today's issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association drives home the point that those stated calorie counts are not always accurate. So, what you think you are getting for breakfast, lunch or dinner may in fact have more (and in some cases, fewer) calories than what is posted on the menu. This is bound to make our journey to health all the more difficult.

The researchers took a sample of various meals from a number of nationwide chains in different parts of the country. They then analyzed those food portions to see if the calories listed on the menu or available from other sources such as restaurant websites in fact accurately portrayed the number of calories contained in the actual portion served in the restaurant.

Overall, when looking at total averages of everything, the stated calories matched up pretty well to the actual calories. However, 19% of the individually tested foods had at least 100 more calories than stated. The researchers even found one side dish that had 1000 calories more than what the dish was supposed to have according to the restaurant's information. 40% of the tested foods had at least 10 calories more per portion than stated. On the "good" side, 52% had at least 10 calories lower than the claimed amount.

One interesting finding in the "sit down" restaurant category was the observation that the lower the stated calorie content the greater the chances that the actual calorie count was higher. This was particularly true for portions that were supposed to be 625 calories and lower. That happens to be the place where many diet-conscious patrons go on the menu to get something that won't help pack on the pounds, so the discrepancy there is especially problematic.

For those foods on the top 10 list of this study (the 10% of the tested foods that had the highest difference between tested and stated calories), the actual difference was about 289 calories per portion. On second testing to confirm that finding, the actual number was 258 calories.

Why all the fuss over a couple of calories here and a couple of calories there? What difference does it really make?

Consider some of these facts, as highlighted in the article and an editorial that appeared in the same journal:

A pound of fat contains about 3500 calories. If you reduce your intake 500 calories a day, you will lose a pound a week. On the other hand, as noted in the original article, if you eat just 100 calories more a day than your body needs (that would be a reasonably sized apple or perhaps a cookie), you will gain approximately 10 to 30 pounds a year.In the United States, from 1970 through 2008, we spent 42% less money on eating food at home, and 26% more eating away from home. 30% of our calories today come from snacks, desserts and pizza, while for young people between the ages of 14 to 18, 40% of their calories come from these same foods. And as you might guess, desserts, carbohydrate-rich foods and salads were the foods that had the highest differences between what was stated on the menu or the website and what was actually contained in the foods tested.

So what appears to be a small difference over time can add up to big pounds.  And as a nation, we are well into the "big pounds" game, as reflected in the second piece of research that garnered a good deal of media attention today.

Every year the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention looks at the percentage of people in the United States who are overweight and obese. And each year the number goes up and up and up. 

For 2010, the CDC has reported that 25% of the residents in 36 states were obese. Not just overweight, but obese. In many states-especially in the South-over 30% of the residents are obese. The leader was Mississippi where slightly more than one out of every three people is obese. Colorado was at the lower end of the list with 21%--or one out of five people-obese. But even the winner was a loser because in the past Colorado had far fewer obese people than was the case in 2010.

This is no idle discussion, especially as we look into the future.

Obesity impacts our lives and the length of our days. Cancer, heart disease, stroke, blood pressure and a number of other conditions are impacted by overweight and obesity. As we age, the impact of being overweight and obesity limits our mobility, just when we are looking forward to spending more time with our families and having the freedom to do more of the things we want to do.

I have become more and more convinced over time that although we can make the "big splash" by losing lots of weight over a relatively short period of time, it is the 100 calories here and 100 calories there that add up to big differences. 100 extra calories a day means one extra pound a month, 12 extra pounds a year. And who stops at just 100 extra calories?

As I have written many times before, this is a battle I know personally. It is difficult, frequently not successful, and full of traps.

One of the traps we don't need, however, is inaccurate information from those who are supposed to be telling us the caloric content of the foods we eat. As this research paper suggests, those restaurants who serve us more and more frequently need to do a better job of telling us exactly what is in the food we eat-just as they tell us accurately how much we will have to pay for it at the cash register.

One final thought, from the editorial in JAMA, in the words of the author:

"Just as balancing a budget can prevent debt, balancing caloric intake with output can prevent added pounds. However, US residents seem to be struggling with both balancing acts. New, innovative, and effective approaches to teaching about energy balance and calorie control are greatly needed."

So, the lesson is that just like "dollars in, dollars out" is important in our financial lives, so is "calories in, calories out" in helping us understand what makes us the way we are. We are doomed to failure if we don't have that basic accurate information and understanding about the calories we consume and spend in our daily activities.  It's time to get it right.

 

DoD Using Virtual Reality for PTSD

A humvee slowly drives down a dusty road in Afghanistan and seconds later, an IED explodes off to the right, causing the windshield to crack and the driver to swerve.

Time to press the restart button.

At a demonstration, guests at the National Press Club saw first-hand the capabilities of virtual reality in treating Soldiers with post-traumatic stress disorder.

The Defense Department's Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury have begun a pilot program that uses multi-sensory virtual reality to treat Soldiers with post-traumatic stress disorder. The program enables doctors to choose a scenario, customized around a Soldier's personal experience.

Brig. Gen. Loree K. Sutton, director of the program, said she is very hopeful in the use of virtual reality but notes that no one approach will reach out and touch everyone.

"We owe these young Americans our very best," Sutton said. "We know the issues of post-traumatic stress, these unseen wounds of war. If left in silence, they can be the deadliest wounds of all."

More information and resources on PTSD.

Sutton said medical specialists are constantly learning more about treating PTSD and TBI, and how these injuries fit into other types of injuries from war.

"It requires an integrative, team-oriented, inter-disciplinary approach that puts on a par the physical, psychological, moral and spiritual wounds of war," Sutton said. "That's our challenge."

Sutton said it is key to continue breaking down the stigma of seeking help. She said servicemembers must realize that reaching out is an act of courage and strength.

"Stigma is a toxic, deadly hazard that keeps our troops from reaching out," Sutton said.

Dr. Greg Reger, acting chief for the Defense Department's National Center for Telehealth and Technology, Innovative Technology Applications Division, said the virtual reality program can be customized, down to details such as IED attacks, convoys and environment.

Reger explained that when an individual encounters something dangerous, a survival program kicks into action, which involves remembering things seen, heard and smelled, and the emotions and responses to the event. Reger said these associations live together and when encountered, the survival program reacts, causing anxiety. The natural human response is to avoid future encounters.

"The problem is that it provides short-term comfort, but in the long-run, people give up large portions of their very meaningful life in order to just manage their anxiety," Reger said.

Reger explained the traditional approach to treatment is exposure therapy, which involves the individual (with the guidance of a doctor) confronting the anxiety issues, instead of avoidance.

"A servicemember would come into my office (after a few sessions), close his or her eyes and tell me about the event that is still troubling them," Reger said.

He said research has shown that individuals that have a high level of emotional engagement respond best to treatment. To increase emotional engagement, virtual reality enables servicemembers to confront these issues, which activates the memory and potentially, treats PTSD.

 

Ultimate Impact of Pacquiao v. Marquez, Mayweather v. Ortiz

It's fitting that Manny Pacquiao and Floyd Mayweather Jr., two of boxing's biggest and brightest stars, are at the forefront of a battle between Top Rank and Golden Boy, as well as Showtime and HBO.

Pacquiao and the rest of Top Rank rocked HBO to its very core this past May, when they opted to take their fight against "Sugar" Shane Mosley to Showtime. While a lot of factors contributed to the decision, HBO's undeniable tendency to feud with Top Rank's Bob Arum and tight relationship with Mayweather throughout the negotiations for Pacquiao v. Mayweather played a sizable role. Ultimately, Pacquiao v. Mosley drew the year's most successful pay-per-view (PPV) totals with 1.3 million buys for Showtime, and shortly thereafter, HBO President Ross Greenburg stepped down from his post.

Now, with September and November poised to be the most carefully watched consecutive months for the sport of boxing in a long while, the feud between all factions involved is once again taking center stage. Speaking with BoxingScene.com, Golden Boy boss Richard Schaefer made it very clear that his -- and as a result, HBO's -- biggest goal at this point is promoting the heck out of Mayweather's upcoming match against Victor Ortiz.

"I have no doubt that [Mayweather-Ortiz] will be the most heavily promoted fight in the history of boxing," said Schaefer about the welterweight title fight scheduled for Sept. 17 in Las Vegas. "No question about it. … I looked back at the marketing plan they had for De La Hoya and Mayweather, and I swear to you, it pales to that. So I'm really excited about it.

"I think the sky's the limit. And I think the beneficiary is the sport of boxing and those two athletes. Because you have the most skilled [boxer] of our generation and you have a young man which I think is a very tough opponent, who has an amazing story, an amazing personality. All that is why I'm convinced that this will be the biggest pay-per-view event of this year."

And HBO's newfound desire to utilize each and every asset that they have thanks to parent company, Time Warner, stems from Showtime's excellent promoting of Pacquiao v. Mosley through their parent company, CBS.

It remains to be seen, however, if Pacquiao and Top Rank were impressed enough by Showtime's efforts to re-sign with them for Pacquiao vs. Juan Manuel Marquez, scheduled for November 12. At the moment, Arum and his group are still evaluating which route is best for them, especially with HBO now realizing that Showtime poses a legitimate threat to their way of handling matches.

September and November promise to be fascinating not only because of the matches scheduled, but because of the implications those matches have on massive entities like Golden Boy, Top Rank, HBO and Showtime.

Stayed tuned, it's going to be an interesting couple of months.

 

Wake Up, Work Out — Then Eat Breakfast

The premise: Breakfast is billed as the most important meal of the day—but you may want to hold off on eating it until after your daily workout. Researchers in Belgium set up a six-week study to determine if the order of men's morning routines would make a difference in terms of weight loss and other health aspects. "We hypothesized that training in the fasted state would be a better strategy to improve fat metabolism," says the study's lead author Karen Van Proeyen, Ph.D. "However, we were rather surprised that almost all measured parameters were more beneficially affected following a training program before breakfast, compared with a similar training session after breakfast."

The set-up: The researchers recruited 28 healthy, active men and tweaked their daily diets to include 50 percent more fat and 30 percent more calories (to enhance the effect). The men were then broken into three groups. The first group endured no exercise at all, while the other two groups were both given grueling morning exercise routines. Four times a week, they ran and cycled at intense levels. However, of those two groups, one worked out after a carbohydrate-rich breakfast and drank sports drinks throughout their workout. The other group drank only water and ate breakfast after hitting the gym.

The results: The group that didn't exercise at all gained an average of more than six pounds (we're surprised it wasn't more!). They also developed unhealthy conditions that are often precursors of diabetes including an insulin resistance. The men who ate breakfast before exercising also gained weight (although only about half as much as the first group) and similar cautionary diabetes signs. The group that exercised before breakfast gained almost no weight and showed no signs of insulin resistance. They also burned the extra dietary fat more efficiently.

The takeaway: Exercise routines in this study were very intense 60- to 90-minute sessions. Yet the researchers have said even less intense workouts could have similar results. The old something-is-better-than-nothing way of thinking!

"I recommend exercising before breakfast, of course," says Van Proeyen. But she can't recommend an ideal breakfast menu: "Based on our findings we cannot say what the best breakfast is. However, a healthy, well-balanced fiber-rich breakfast—mainly consisting of carbohydrates—is the most optimal breakfast to maintain a good health in normal fit individuals."

We wanted to know if this trick would work with lunchtime workouts too. Turns out, it doesn't. "Our subjects always performed the exercise after a 10- to 12-hour overnight fast, which is likely the most convenient way to stimulate fat oxidation." The time between breakfast and lunch is only about 4 to 6 hours and that's not enough time to maximize fat oxidation before the workout. Moral of the story: Set your alarm earlier each morning. Get your daily run out of the way, eat breakfast at your desk and enjoy a long, gym-free lunch break.