Modern recovery is no longer reserved for elite athletes. In this conversation from Jay Feldman Wellness, the focus is metabolic health: how deliberate stress, precise rest, and simple protocols can help the body return to equilibrium.
Timestamps link directly to the original YouTube video at that moment.
I think it really does pick up on the the shame that's permeated our our eating and we've been trained and conditioned to feel like hunger is a bad thing. You know, Mike, when we were eating between five and eight plantains a day that were cooked in butter and salt and then we poured honey on them and cinnamon and whatever else, we weren't thinking at the time, this is a sign of our addiction and and you know, this is really unhealthy for us. Oh, look, nucleus incumbent lights up when you have fructose or you have sugar and it also lights up when you have cocaine. See, they're the same. And it's like that's imprecise. I would basically say I don't think it's ever beneficial to do Wimhof breathing like in a global sense. Um and I would basically say the same when it comes to cold plunges except for one specific effect that you could argue for both of them. Okay, welcome to the bioenergetic view. I am still your host Teresa Pella joined as always by Jay Feldman and Mike Fave. and I'm really excited we're finally getting to these Q & A's and hopefully they will be interesting to everyone tuning in as well. We're going to be talking about the differences between good cravings and bad cravings, how to determine which stressors are beneficial or not, the differences between stress from sauna, exercise, cold exposure, and fasting, and how a low carb diet could be causing fatigue and allergies. Are you guys ready?
Yeah. Let's do it. Okay. So, starting off with David's question. He says, "Thank you for your insights and information. However, how do you distinguish between good cravings like salt, fat, sweets, and bad cravings, nicotine, alcohol, drugs? How does one know that a good craving isn't in fact a bad craving? For instance, I have ankalyzing spondylitis. A lot of salt seems to make it worse and very minimal salt seems to be somewhat helpful. I assume that good cravings also have their limitations. I'm glad we're starting off with this one because it it comes back to some of the original quotes I heard from Rey talking about how cravings might be showing and reflecting an underlying need of the body. And I love that frame to think about how actually even even putting something in the category of good or bad might be throwing us in a direction that isn't helpful. If we can start to look at what the body is asking for, then maybe that changes how we ask questions and the answers we get. So Jay, to to jump in on David's question, where do you want to begin here? Yeah, it's a good question and one that can actually be kind of like complex if we really unpack it. Uh because what he's getting at is something that we talk about a lot which is that our bodies have signals for a reason. If they're telling us to eat food, like
especially if we're undereating and we're dealing with cravings for calorie dense foods or we just want to eat a lot, most people look at that as a bad thing. They look at that as the enemy when they're dieting and that's the thing they need to fight against. That's the thing they need to restrict uh from. Same thing with carbohydrates and sweets and anything with that sweet taste. You know, it's something that we end up discussing a lot because of, you know, the how big the low carb sphere is at the moment. And one of their obviously major tenants is avoiding carbohydrates. And this idea that our innate desire, taste, craving for those foods is actually a bad thing, right? It's it's like a a negative thing that we don't want to listen to. We want to make sure to restrict uh in that regard. And we also hear it in the mainstream in a ton of different uh ways whether it's talking about just calorie dense foods or highly processed foods. You know the potato chips that taste really good like those are bad for you and uh the you know cakes and cookies and all of that. Salt is another one that he mentioned here where again mainstream perspective is salt isn't good for you even though you have this taste for it. You you know you need to restrict it. So it's something that we end up butdding up against quite a bit. you know this basically taking like finding that the opposite stance is often true when it comes to our physiology which is that cravings and desires are there for a reason and that doesn't always mean that listening to the craving and I think the way people think that that means is the
right choice for example like craving a donut I don't think any of us would say okay that means you need to eat a donut doesn't necessarily mean like never eat a donut either but what I would more so say is that's probably an indication that either we're underfed, like we're not getting enough calories, maybe we're dealing with some extra stress right now, maybe we are lacking either fat or carbohydrates, which are both really high in donuts. And it would probably be a lot better to satisfy that craving with something else. Obviously, Mike, I know you're thinking macnuts right now along with maybe some dried fruit and and dark chocolate. Exactly. Um, so something like that is is more what our recommendation would be. Not that the craving for or what's underlying the craving is a problem, but what most people satisfy those cravings with is a problem. And the way they interpret it, right? They're they're thinking that this is something that they're they're trying to resist and they don't want to give into and they aren't actually understanding where the craving is coming from. They aren't actually understanding this is coming from a physiological need. So, there's a lot to unpack here. And then there's this other variable thrown in here which is like some of these addictive substances like nicotine and drugs and and that that kind of gets into another territory but I think in many ways there's a lot of parallels and we've kind of talked around this a little bit at times and it's definitely something that Ray talked about um which is basically this idea of addiction also being something that comes from the physiological need. Obviously, the goal not being to satisfy that addiction with something that's harmful to us in the same way that we don't want to satisfy the the craving
with something that's harmful to us, but there it's still coming from like being something that comes from an underlying physiological need. One study that's pointed to a lot or there's a handful of these on rodents where they're given free access to some version of a drug like I believe they use some version of like heroin or something like that or maybe cocaine. I think it was cocaine, the ones I'm thinking of, but yeah, sim similar. Yeah. Um, and they have some some of them that are uh experiencing like a really stimulating environment with a lot of new experiences, a lot of interesting things going on. Like they have good social interaction, all of that versus other ones that are in a bas basically a very poor environment. And the ones that are in the really enriching environment uh don't have the same addictive tendencies as those that that are in a really poor environment, which is basically pointing to that addiction being the result of a physiological need for social interaction and having uh interesting novel experiences and an enriched environment. And so I do think it's very parallel here. And what I think I'm kind of getting to as I'm explaining this is that when it comes to cravings, what I would say is we need to understand where they're coming from, like what the underlying physiological need is and then try to satisfy that need in a healthy way. And it's not as much about giving into the cravings or that there are good or bad cravings, but rather cravings come from some physiological need. Let's determine what that is and let's respond to it in a
healthy, constructive way. uh as opposed to trying to satisfy a desire for salt with, you know, French fries from McDonald's or trying to satisfy a desire for a meaningful life and good social interaction and all of that with alcohol and drugs. You've heard me talk about the energy balance solution program before and all of the benefits we help people experience, but I want you to hear it from the members themselves. Here are just a few of the recent wins people have shared in the energy balance solution group calls. I lost another 12 lbs. And my A1C, last time we talked, I was in a 10 with my A1C. It dropped into the mid7s. I'm pretty sure if I my blood meter is correct. I was sleeping better. I've been having uh even a few nights of 8 hours. I'm really happy. I've always kind of had lots of gum inflammation, lots of bleeding during cleanings and everything and kind of figured that was just how it was. And there was none of that. My my hygienist was like absolutely shocked. I've noticed that my body is just handling water retention a lot better. I would always wake up really bloated in the morning and that's all gone. My biggest um concern was my constipation. It's been fantastic and it's good healthy stools sometimes two times a day, you know, and it's just amazing. I can't believe this. I feel better. I I got good energy. I sleep better than I have in a long time. The last temperature I took during the day was 98. 16, which is phenomenal for me. I'm usually
low 97s. Overall, it looks really good. Like my uh A1C is a 9 is 5. which is trending down. My insulin looks really good. The fasting glucose just is the lowest it's ever been. Um so overall, just some really encouraging numbers there. TSH was 1. 9, which is was 2. 9, you know, 6 months ago. If you want to have results just like that, then head over to jvelman wellness. com / solution to check out all of the details for the energy balance solution program. Yeah, Mike, when I read this question, what were you thinking in terms of things that are more addictive and can be yes, someone trying to maybe stabilize, lower stress, they're just at a point where life feels unbearable, overwhelming, and say they are turning to something like alcohol or they're using nicotine to get like a dopamine burst or to feel more productive. How would you handle that? What would you tell this person if they're maybe confused, feeling shameful about it, but also wanting to take better care of themselves? I think I divide these and I guess this is like a somewhat of like a semantic game with language, but I it does it actually when you make the distinction becomes important. So I would say things with in terms of nicotine, alcohol and addictive drugs are more compulsive than they are actually cravings. So people are compelled to use them for a variety of circumstances of course right. So you
know to manage stress like this is the tool that they decided to use in in different circumstances whereas the cravings that we actually get from food are actual cravings. So the craving here being defined as we are seeking something that we have a a physiologic need for and a compulsion on this other side being seeking something that is somehow it has an addictive quality to it or it's helping us. It it's not something that we necessarily have a physiologic need for but is that that pushes us towards a propensity of continu continued use of this thing. Right? So, and I think that when we're looking in the low carb sphere versus like a pro metabolic sphere, right, it's always this versus everything has to be this dichotomy that we get pushed towards. But, um, I think there's a piece of this that's actually important and that's true that comes out of the low carb sphere that people will have compulsive eating towards certain types of foods because they have been engineered to create compulsion. So the difference between having a donut versus so I I want to have carbs right I'm craving carbs and I crave a donut or maybe it's not it starts as a craving and then it generally moves into a compulsive state of eating you and that you see low carb gurus will talk about this right where one donut turns to two turns to three turns the whole box whereas on the flip side there's an initial need or craving for a carbohydrate the person went to use this particular food to meet it and then the food is engineered to create a compulsive consump consumption pattern. I think that's where this like crossover
happens between cravings and compulsion. But I do think that they're separate and trying to bridge them together as your craving for salt is akin or your craving for sugar is akin to a craving for cocaine or heroin or nicotine. I think that's conflation of two different things. So I don't even think they're the same thing. I think there's different things going on. I think when we look at salts, fats, and sugars, we have a craving for those things because of our physiologic need. And the problem comes in in what food you are choosing to hit and use that craving. So the source of carbohydrate to hit the sweet craving is very important. And Jay pointed the same thing with salt. The source that you use to hit your salt craving is extremely important. If you're going to get French fries from McDonald's, you now have you are trying to meet a physiologic need with a compulsion inducing option. And so in that sense, the the problem we have is that we have kind of a bridge now because of the processed food system, the food engineering that goes on. is it it creates compulsion for people. Whereas your normal food sources, your berries, your potatoes, your your steaks, your your um your macadamia nuts, your things like this, even dark chocolate, there's they're not such compulsive foods. Um they don't create these high level compulsion. Like try to eat a ridiculous amount of potatoes. For the vast majority of people, there's a satiety limit. Like you're going to hit a wall in terms of how much you can actually have. Now if you get French fries deep fried in oil and covered in in salt the that limit is
adjusted. There's a mismatch in terms of your satiety signaling with that and the food there becomes more of a compulsive consumption. So I think there's this conflation and this kind of muddying the waters in in the low carb sphere around food addictions and food cravings and food noise. And I think a lot of people, at least in my experience with clients, when they come out of a low carb setup, or even other dietary setups that are highly restrictive, and you get into a setup that allows you to actually have a a diet that has a variety of different food options, including carbs, including fats, including proteins, right? We're not we don't have to choose between high carb, low fat, or low fat, high carb. I'm not No, we we don't have any of that. But you you get to this point where you're eating a diet that meets your needs, the cravings disappear and then if the food selection is appropriate, so do the compulsions. There's no need for those compulsions anymore. So that's how I differentiate and distinguish between these things. I don't think there's a physiologic need for nicotine, alcohol, or any of the drugs. I think people are compelled to use them for a variety of different circumstances. I think they're using them as they potentially start either using them as a tool to manage stress or to manage some component of their life that that to basically check out or sedate themselves um in different environments for something like alcohol or heroin or whatever or they get engrossed in it when they're younger from social pressure and then because it's compulsive and addicted it keeps them moving forward. And then for food, I think people have a general physiologic need. And then there's the problem now is in the modern environment, foods have been engineered
to create compulsive and addictive qualities around some of these food options instead of people choosing an appropriate food option to meet that need. So that is kind of the difference that I would set things up here as um or the distinctions I would make. And then in terms of the the amounts, right? Can you get too much carbohydrate? Can you get too much sugar? Yes, of course you can. Can you get too much fat? 100%. The argument here is not that you should eat unlimited quantities of salt or sugar or fat or even total energy intake. The argument here is that you want to have enough energy intake, enough carbohydrate intake, enough salt intake, enough potassium, calcium, magnesium, B vitamins, enough resource and substrate for your system to work at an optimal level. That's the question here. It's removing these ideas of puritanic restriction around all the foods that I I can't have carbs because they're addictive. And you know this like constant self-lagulation around inherent things that you have. It's like this idea that carbs are evil and they're addictive is like this replacement of of original sin, right? It's like this idea that we have these inherently problematic um drives in our system. And instead of recognizing them as like no, our body is telling us, hey, this is an intelligent signal to meet a physiologic need so that we can avoid relying on stress systems and and degradation of the system altogether. Right? If you don't have enough salt, you have RAS RAS system activation with eldoststerone. If you don't have enough carbs, you're going to elevate cortisol
signaling, glucagon signaling, degrade amino acids, degrade glycogen stores. If you don't have enough fat, you start to see an increase in adrenaline and growth hormone to release stored fatty acids from the tissues. So the body is trying to maintain its structure, right? And and it's giving us cues to allow us to do that. Our nervous system is regulating things. Those cravings are coming from this regulation process. The nicotine, alcohol, cocaine, heroin, that's not necess that's an hijacking of the entire system and through compulsive substance use. This which is very different from physiologic need. So that would be my take on this. And again, is there two is would a lot of salt create issues? Yes, you can take too much salt. You could put too much pressure on the RAS system by creating sodium potassium imbalance or sodium fluid imbalance. You can also create salt stress in the intestine. So if you have somebody who has anklosing spondylitis and they have an overgrowth of pathogenic bacteria like klepsial and pneumonia that's le leaking endotoxin and driving the autoimmune process and you take high doses of salt and create salt stress in the intestine and allow the intestine to become leakier. Okay. Now you could create an issue in this person's context. So it's again it's about finding the right amount for that person's context and not just creating a rule carbs are evil and then running with that carbs are good or carbs are bad. This like dichotomy um if any if you ever crave anything well that that's that's inherently a bad thing. These heruristics are not helpful long term they're not helpful. They're helpful for
people in the short term because if you come off a standard American diet and you say, "Hey, I'm not going to eat any carbohydrates, you basically like cut out the vast majority of crap compulsive foods that you can eat." Now, it's a little different now, right? Because now you have keto treats. But prior to keto treats, you know, when when we were doing keto, low carb if and things like this, you didn't have those same options. So, your diet really wound up being this like very basic, even if it wasn't carnivore, it was keto, it was going to be I'm going to have some vegetables and I'm going to have some type of animal protein source and I'm going to have some type of high quality fat source, olive oil, dairy fat, some type of nut or something like this. So, which is arguably much better than the standard American diet. And so, are people going to get better from that? Yes. And then on carnivore, you have an extreme elimination diet that cuts out everything and then you are left with steaks, which to be fair are very nutrient-dense. Steaks and organ meats, you can hit a lot of micronutrients. You can hit a lot of needs with that, especially if you're coming from a standard American diet. Depending on how it was set up, you could be missing quite a few things. Um, and you could have long-standing dispiosis from that. So, there's a lot of things that the carnivore stuff solves and cuts out. So initially you have this nice heristic eliminate carbs which eliminates a lot of problems but it's like it's just a broad stroke. It's imprecise. It misses a lot of things creates a lot of new problems down the line and it creates dichotoies and almost um um like a religious zeal around minimizing
carbohydrates and then it tries to backwardsly justify it with things like oh um this is an addiction, right? You're addicted if you want carbohydrates. And I think that's where you bordering into territory. It's like, yeah, this is just not reality. That's just there's much more nuance to the picture here. And again, this is not I'm not saying that David's saying this. I think David's question is coming out of that sphere. So, I'm trying to frame it from that sphere to provide my answer. Yeah. And I love that you did it that way because I think it really does pick up on the the shame that's permeated our our eating and our we've we've been trained and conditioned to feel like hunger is a bad thing or a specific craving is a bad thing when in fact I think we all see it as a really wise and beautiful rebalancing act that we can learn to pay attention to and work with and get to know what our bodies are asking for and delivering what it's asking for in a very intentional way. And I I like that you were able to talk about it in terms of like, okay, here's a biological need versus here's more of a compulsive like self-perpetuating addictive tendency. And I guess I think about it also in terms of the trauma component because a lot of people that use nicotine, alcohol, and drugs are really under chronic stress that they might not even be aware of. And they're using these substances to Mike, like you said, kind of like numb or feel better
or get a break from being in this heightened chronic stress state that has become so familiar to them that they don't even know that they're in it. and to start to pull out like, okay, well, can we think about it in terms of what is your body asking for? What is and what are you actually using to numb? Then we can start to come back to maybe some more clarity as to how to approach cravings versus sedation, numbing, escapism, and and not put them in the same category. So, thank you for dividing it like that because as David was asking, how do you distinguish? Well, if we can think about food as, okay, we need food, we want our bodies to thrive, we can get curious and excited about how to listen to these cravings versus if we're under a lot of stress and we know I think with the compulsions, Mike, like you were saying, it's like it it has like a grip on certain people and to understand like a compulsion doesn't feel good. Whereas, you know, eating some mac nuts with chocolate when you really need some extra fat and salt and, you know, maybe some dopamine um feels different when that craving is actually satisfied. Yeah. I want to just add one piece to this because some of the other research that that I think Jay you were alluding to talks about that some of these food options light up the nucleus encumbent um which is similar to other other substances and it's like that doesn't
just because you have one pathway where you show similarity where you show reward centers specifically lighting up in response to consumption that doesn't then say that they are the same thing right this is the same kind of logical fallacy stuff that you see from um like Dr. Robert Lustig with oh fructose pathway in the liver, alcohol pathway in the liver. Look similarities like I think some of the same thing comes from his like oh look nucleus incumbent lights up when you have fructose or you have sugar and it also lights up when you have cocaine. See, they're the same. And it's like that's imprecise. That's in it's there's much more that goes on instead of highlighting a single mechanistic pathway and being like, "Hey, look, there we go. Like they're the same thing." That's not how it necessarily works. And if you bring it out into a broader context and you like especially from a protabolic biogetic context like Dr. pizza context, you would look there and you say, "Of course you would get a reward center when you have adequate carbohydrate and you have adequate you eat fatty components and stuff like this. Of course, you're going to get a reward signaling thing. Your your body is searching out in the environment to find substrate to power the machine, right? To provide the mitochondria with carbohydrates and fatty acids to run effectively. So of course you're going to get a reward a system inbuilt that prioritizes seeking those things out. Of course you're going to get it. That doesn't mean there there's also a matching piece like once that is once the system is lit up once you have you
have sated the reward there doesn't always have to be this continued compulsive drive to eat. That's the thing that's important here and that's dependent upon the source that you use. If you use donuts okay like you may have some compulsion there. Is that because carbohydrates are the problem? I don't think so. That donuts have carbohydrates, but they have a lot of other things inbuilt in them to drive a compulsion. Whereas blueberries aren't really a compulsive eating food. You know, if you haven't eaten carbs for a long time, sure, like when you start eating blueberries, like man, I really these are pretty good. But when you are consist when you have consistently had your like carbohydrates on a regular basis, like you don't sit there and smash the whole bag of blueberries like I'm good. I got what I need. There's not this compulsive drive. So like that's another piece that's very important. Just because you see this this similar response in the nucleus between some substances doesn't mean that their impact on the body and the system is exactly the same. And I think that trying to wax that mechanism is is imprecise. I'm not even saying that I'm not saying that lustic has like said that's the whole picture. But he has brought that mechanism up. I'm pretty sure. And then people run with it in this fashion and make it seem like well because they these reward centers are activated in the brain. Well, you know, sugar is just as bad as cocaine. It's like that is like such a this is not logically correct at all. Like to even to to go there is not logically correct. It just says in this specific pathway
they're they activate similar similar circuitry. That's the only thing that it says. Yeah. still amazing that a claim like that is received and a lot of people still believe it. You know, sugar is the same as cocaine. And I think hopefully with enough time that will start to dissolve and people will realize like Mike's saying, they're not quite the same. But I mean, even in David's situation where he's realizing he's labeled salt as something that he he knows is good, but with his context, with his health issues, there's a balancing act. So, I mean, maybe even thinking about, okay, these good cravings that even if he were to have as much as he really wanted, it it seems to make things worse. How can we like what what would you tell David if he were a client of yours, Jay? Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up because I think there's a lot of overlap between like it's not It would be nice if it was nice like clean neat boxes where it's like this is compulsion. This is responding to a biological need always. This is always responding to like hunger, cravings like but but there's a lot of overlap. There's a lot of gray area and the salt is a perfect example. Or as you said earlier, Mike, like just because carbs in general are have benefits and fat has benefits and protein has benefits, that doesn't mean that every person should be eating tons of each or the same amount of each. Like it's going to vary from
from individual to individual based on so many nuances. And of course, like this is a perfect example here with salt. And you touched on another one, Mike, which is the relationship with other uh vitamins and minerals like potassium, for example. You know, if someone's like I've seen a number of situations where someone mentions when I have salts, I have an increase in swelling and edema and water weight and blood pressure. And that could be a scenario where maybe they're undereating potassium and we've got this imbalance there. Or they're just majorly overdoing the salt. I know people have used salt as a supplement. This was especially popular maybe like 5 years ago where people would do like a quarter half a teaspoon of salt as like a supplement multiple times a day. And again, not to say that there aren't circumstances where that could be beneficial. And salt has a bunch of anti-stress effects and has a lot of benefits, but we need to consider these things based on our individual circumstances. And we need to consider our reactions and our responses to these things as well. So in this case of somebody who's dealing with this sort of negative response and they have ankylosing spondilitis that's helpful to know in the same way that maybe this person could eat macadamia nuts and dark chocolate and have bad responses or they could be eating you know um drinking orange juice or eating apples and be having a bad response and there's a lot of underlying things that could be off there. It doesn't mean that the craving was bad or that the biological need isn't there, but it could mean that there's other kind of pathology going on. And in the case of AS and most autoimmune conditions, um, we see a lot
of dysfunction in the gut. And as Mike was alluding to, like that could be part of what's going on here depending on how they're eating the salt. Like if if he's if David's having like a really large amount of salt all at once, that could be a factor. or maybe there's a a lack of potassium intake or maybe there's something else going on with the foods that he tends to eat a lot of salt with. You know, it's it's hard to say in this individual circumstance without having more information. But I think it's an important point in terms of separating the biological need from the food itself or the intervention itself and the response because each of those can be coming from different places. uh and we could have a need for more carbohydrates and we could then satisfy it with let's say grapes and we see our blood sugar goes up to 220 because we're physiologically insulin resistant and then we say oh well grapes are bad and my physiological need for grapes that was a craving that was uh that's an addiction to fruit and that's really unhealthy and I think that's where we really start to run into issues and there's there's not clean neat boxes here uh which makes it a little bit challenging. You know, another example like Mike, you were talking earlier about the difference between having let's say like boiled potatoes which are nearly impossible to overeat versus having you know potatoes alongside fat and salt in the form of French fries which are much easier to quote unquote overeat. However, if you're in a position where you're chronically underfed and you're making potatoes with butter and salt and you're
finding that when you eat them, you can eat a lot of them and you still want more, that doesn't necessarily mean that the potatoes are bad or that you don't need to eat a lot of them. You know, Mike, when we were eating between five and eight plantains a day that were cooked in butter and salt and then we poured honey on them and cinnamon and whatever else, we weren't thinking at the time, this is a sign of our addiction and and you know, this is really unhealthy for us. Rather, we were recognizing that there is this inherent biological need that was there that had been there for years and we had been resisting it and we needed to over time like restore uh like replenish this nutrient that we were really deficient in and replenish this the state like get back to a better metabolic state. So again, there's a lot of gray area here and it's not as simple as food that tastes good is bad or if you have a bad response to something, it means that there's not a physiological need there. And as far as parsing that out, it's a I'm trying to come up with some like simple strategies and rules. And I think there's certainly no one-izefits - all like set of of recommendations here, but and it can be hard to distinguish between what's like a healthy desire and an unhealthy desire. And so I think it's a combination of paying attention to how you feel after you quote unquote satisfy the cravings. Consider whether there's other foods that you can do some testing with and try to satisfy the same cravings with other things and see what those differences are. Obviously there's some level of understanding the
physiology that's important too. You know, it that's why like that piece is important for understanding the difference between a donut and French fries from McDonald's versus French fries made at home with tallow or or butter versus, you know, boiled sweet potato um versus fruit. You know, not saying that any of those is necessarily better than the other. It depends on the individual. And we talked about this as well when it came to the Sour Patch Kids versus an apple. I don't remember the exact scenario. It was uh Jeff Jeff Nippard, right? And I don't remember the other guy. Uh Jessie James. What's that? Jesse James. Okay. Yeah, Jesse James. And yeah, thank you. And as we were saying, like you could have a craving for sugar. And for one person, satisfying that craving with the apple could go really bad. Could lead to like bloating and brain fog and maybe flaring of an autoimmune condition. And if that person had had the the Sour Patch Kids instead or the gummy worms, they might be much better off and they might have actually kind of satisfied the need. and and moved on versus for other people they do way better with with Apple. So there's certainly no uh neat clean boxes. I think listening to those cravings and trying to tune in. One recommendation I often have for clients is trying to get down to more of the root of the craving or desire. So if they say like I want pizza or I want donuts or I want ice cream, those are obviously foods that have a lot of different components in there. there's salt, there's fat, there's carbohydrates, there's, you know, starches, sugars. And I try to have
somebody think like, would you eat like a piece of butter right now, you know, and if so, that's pointing maybe more toward this being a fat, like a desire for fat, or would you eat, you know, like plain white rice, like is that more of what you're craving? And by asking ourselves those questions, like kind of simplifying it fully, you know, orange juice could be an example for more something more on the sugary side. those could tell us a little bit more about what the actual physiological need is as opposed to something that's a lot blurriier like I want to go to McDonald's and and eat a a happy meal or something. Um, so that's one strategy, something to think about. Another, of course, is paying attention to how you respond, which Dave had mentioned here with the salt, which is important, and then kind of digging into why that response might be. And yeah, continue to experiment. One thing I I just want to highlight again is when we have a deep physiological need that that we haven't been meeting for a long time, it can take a while to like satisfy the craving. And if you eat a meal and you don't feel like the craving is satisfied, that doesn't necessarily mean that this is a compulsion as opposed to a biological need. And again, hard to distinguish between those two. Part of this comes down to trusting how you're feeling in other ways as well. Like if you eat this meal and you're feeling bad and you eat more and you're feeling worse versus if your energy is better and your mood is better and you're seeing signs that this is actually the the right path and you actually need to continue adding let's say carbohydrates um or calories is is another one too. You know, and we've talked about this as well when we talked about the kind of all-in approach where when someone's
coming, you know, from severe overtraining, undereating, severe like energy deficits, eating like having a craving for everything and high calorie foods is normal. It's a normal physiological response. You could hypothetically just eat anything you wanted for a period of time and eventually that craving will reduce but there are probably going to be some negative effects in the meantime or you can do that in a more careful way and probably feel better in the processes and have fewer of the side effects. But yeah, just because the biological need isn't immediately satisfied doesn't mean this is necessarily like a negative thing. It's not necessarily an addiction or a compulsion. Mhm. Yeah. I like thinking about it too in terms of how would you feed like a hungry 5-year - old if they're craving something like what would you give a 5-year - old that you care about and you want to be well? You know, you're not going to give them like nicotine gum and a shot of tequila. You might make them, you know, some stuffed dates and with a side of cheese, something that can satisfy and balance. And well, it depends on the person. I guess I shouldn't make assumptions, but that's how I like to frame it. I also think having a bad response to something also doesn't mean, and this is something that you pointed out, Jay, but having a bad response to something doesn't mean that the thing is wrong, right? I made a video a long time ago where Dr. Sean Baker had come off carnivore to like for like a couple days just to try apples or something and then he had a bad response. And it's like, I mean, if you've been only eating meat for a lot to for an extended period of time and
then you try to throw in like a really high FODMAP fruit in a decent quantity and then you get bloating or digestive issues, it's like, is that a problem with carbs or is that part for the course? That's pretty common. I mean, I did it, too. I came off low carb and I tried apple juice and I was at a party when I was in college and and I destroyed some poor girl's bathroom after having apple juice from being low carb because I couldn't tolerate a isolated fructose load with that had an imbalanced fructose to glucose ratio on top of the fact that it was high in sorbital. So this is where knowing some of these little nuances is really important. I mean, a lot of times the clients, that's what we're looking at. They're people are saying, you know, I had it in carbs and like, you know, my sleep is better and my energy is better, but man, I'm so bloated and I look at the carbs like dried mango. It's like, well, and then I don't think carbs are really the problem here, but maybe mang maybe not doing so well with mango. And it's not a forever thing. There is a transition point with the digestive system for certain foods. Now, some people may just not tolerate apples long term. Like, that is what it is. Sometimes it's just how it goes with their microbiome or their digestive capacity for certain types of sugars. That's fair. And that's where there's going to be an individual response to different things. And with the diet, ultimately it's less about like do I choose carnivore, keto, vegan, paleo, bioenergetic, whatever. That's like these titles for the diets are irrelevant. It's actually unimportant.
What's most important is do you set up a diet that allows you to optimally thrive and function appropriately? Does it do you feel good? Do you function well? And do you does your lab values, some of these other markers, does this stuff look good? Are these things moving in the right direction and continuing to maintain? Is it sustainable long term? These are things that we want to see. And like how is your response to this to these things? How is your body responding? And also is this in the context of grounded and appropriate physiology, right? Cuz there's another things like people say, well, I feel much better when I don't eat when I do a 7-day fast. It's like, well, there's a couple there's some issues with that. So, it's not only how well you feels like does the general do you have all of these ducks in a row? Is there consistency across multiple variables? Function, actual tangible results, lab work, outcomes, blood pressure, your temperatures, whatever the thing is, and is it actually grounded in a reasonable physiology and understanding of how things work. You want to have all of these things come together for and then it for your individual diet. There's going to be individual components with that, right? And it's people are going to have different diets that they run with based on their physiology. It's just that's something also to keep in mind. So like I think the dietary camps and try piece obfiscates this and has people try to like fit themselves into the box instead of determine what is going to work for their particular setup and then you know it's easier psychologically I think to go that way but if you really want outcomes it
you're not going to try to slam yourself into the box. I think you that there needs to be a personalization aspect to it and you need to have consistency across these different spheres. Agreed. Yeah. We don't need to over complicate things by making boxes where we don't need them. That being said, I want to jump to the next question. Are Yep. Okay. Bob Caswell asks or he says, "I love the principles behind this discussion, but would love some more practical application. It feels like there's a spectrum of good to bad activities, much like Jay's food guide, where he has green, yellow, red categories in the bioenergetic view for self-inflicted stress. On the one hand, you are all unanimously in favor of resistance training within reason. On the other hand, it seems the other side of the spectrum is that cold plunges are way overrated, but your brief mention of saunas was unclear. Someone said overuse of saunas is bad, but that's quite the hedge. I'd like to know where the following land on your spectrum. You ready, guys? Are you taking notes that I'm trying to get you to make for us here? Laugh out loud. and why sauna use, highintensity interval training, this one especially so much out there suggesting multiple times a week is part of the secret sauce to longevity and things like running, jogging, walking, swimming, sports, etc. I know basic walks and resistance training are good, but then it gets a little murky bioenergetically as to if how hit is good or bad, when does any other
activity make sense to cross over into too much. So yeah, we're kind of back to this this frame and and maybe we can step back and start to see things within context and on a spectrum and understanding intention and effect and all the other moving pieces. So Jay, to start h let's you let's let's touch on the sauna side of things first. Yeah. So I'm actually going to zoom out a little bit first because Okay, please do. And then I I do want to talk about sonnis for sure. But the reason being you know he was asking for a spectrum with these different potent these are all stressors right anything that requires a demand on the body in terms of energy is in this category of a stressor and then and but obviously they all have unique effects as well which are called specific effects. So even though exercise is a stressor, it can cause stress and an infection is a stressor and can cause stress and uh cold plunges are a stressor that can cause stress, they also all have unique effects that are, you know, different between them and have all these different physiological effects. But I think creating, you know, he mentioned like what about creating a spectrum for these in the same way that you do for foods. I think that this just taking that conceptually is important because if we were to create a stressor spectrum, the things that are in the red category versus like the yellow, green, blue are really obvious. Like things that are in the red category are going to be infections, heavy metal exposure, uh poor sleep or lack of sleep, uh
polyunsaturated fats, endotoxin, uh alcohol, like it's all things that have stressor effects and very harmful specific effects, too. And you know, I don't think it's anything too surprising there and everything. And then maybe you could throw uh well, I'll come back to cold punches in a second cuz I think those are one that kind of stand out here a little bit. Um and then I think everything else would mostly be in some version of a like an okay category, but at that point the difference isn't uh whether these things are inherently harmful, right? Like we could say heavy metal exposure, it's a stressor and all the specific effects are negative unless you ask the hormesis people who obviously they would say it's positive because it activates the detoxification pathways that help you clear heavy metals. So more heavy metal exposure is better. But we're going to leave that to the side. Uh that insanity. But when we're talking about these other stressors, they can they all have some level of benefits, but because they have a stressor effect, the rest is very individual because it depends on what you can handle without dipping into stress or with a certain amount of stress. And that's part of where again we're talking about this with responses to cravings and uh addiction versus versus biological need. There's a lot of gray area here. And the same is very much true when it comes to any of these stressors, exercise or sauna for example. And in this case, I would say the the biggest reason for that is because of how much of a demand someone
can handle without dipping too deep into stress. So we could say in general walking is beneficial, but I have clients who have severe chronic fatigue and if I told them that they need to walk 7, 000 steps a day, they would be feeling absolutely awful. I mean, they wouldn't be able to do that for one, and even if they tried to get half that or something, they would be laid up for weeks with like flu-l like symptoms, brain fog, and joint pain and muscle pain, and and you know, all of the rest. So, there's no objective like this is the right amount. It's going to vary considerably based on what you're able to handle, like what your resilience is, how well you produce energy, how much fuel you have on board, how much stress you're already under. If you're already dealing with poor sleep and you're dealing with poor access to good nutrition and a lot of psychological stress and heavy metal exposure and mold exposure, you're there's already a huge amount of stressors being placed on your bodies, let's say on your body, let's say chronic infections as well, then the amount of stress like the stressor effect that you can handle from exercise is probably going to be a lot lower compared to someone who isn't dealing with all those same stressors. So I think that's the crux of at least one piece of the question uh which is like where that spectrum comes from has a lot more to do with where you're at physiologically as opposed to something specific to the intervention. But there are some important differences between the interventions that are worth noting and there's a reason why at least in my view I would say something like sauna is very different from cold plunging where
and exercise where when it comes to using exercise as like one of the easier examples there's a stressor effect of course where this demands some amount of energy from the body and so again if you're underfueled dealing with a lot of other stressors you know even walking could be too much whereas for someone else doing highintensity training 5 days a week could be totally fine like it's something that they can adequately recover from and they feel really good doing and they can even pair that with some resistance training or a sport. You know that that can also be totally fine for someone if they're in a place to be able to handle that. And when it comes to the exercise, it's because we recognize there's the stressor effect, but there's also some specific effects in terms of the impact of these activities on the circulatory system, on the muscularkeeletal system, the fascial system. like there are unique effects of movement that will uh create tension on these different systems and and kind of stimulate them in a way that leads to beneficial outcomes. When it comes to something like cold plunges, the reason why to me at least this falls in a very different category is because the specific effects here tend to be I would say relatively harmful on the harmful side. Not only are you creating a major stressor which is that you're exposing your body to an extreme temperature that it it's trying to maintain homeostatic balance from. So it has to u upregulate its body temperature to meet that like to to try to maintain like a healthy internal temperature and that requires a ton of energy. But also the exposure to
extreme cold itself will trigger the release of stress hormones to an extended amount like beyond just the energy expenditure. like there's some specific effects there. Also, we end up with things like slowed circulatory activity and u like reduced lymphatic flow like all sorts of things that you get as a result of of like being exposed to extreme cold as opposed to the flip side of being exposed to heat in the case of sauna where you tend to increase lymphatic flow, you tend to increase sweating, you tend to increase uh circulation which all have their own unique benefits um that are pretty notable. On top of the fact that yes, there's a stressor effect too, which is that you're exposing your body to a high B like to a very high temperature and it has to try to maintain that balance and that requires energy. But I would say that with sauna there's like a very different balance from cold punches because you're there are unique specific effects to sauna and you don't have those with cold punches or like Wimhof breathing versus bouteco breathing. Again, there can be a stressor effect from both, but with Wimhof, because you're creating respiratory alkalossis, you're creating a lot of additional negative specific effects to the point where I would basically say I don't think it's ever beneficial to do Wimhof breathing like in a global sense. Um, and I would basically say the same when it comes to cold plunges, except for one specific effect that you could argue for both of them that maybe someone could consider to be beneficial, which is this idea of like overcoming a challenge in
the same way that like go doing like a boot camp for the military. Like there's all sorts of really harsh stress going on on the body, but you could say at the end like this was worth it because I felt like I was able to accomplish something and this was it was like an important goal for me. like that's a part of any potential uh goal for of different stressors. So that's a factor to consider. But when we're just talking about it more on the physical side, I don't think that there's really anything beneficial about Wimhof breathing or cold plunges. Um one other throw out here to throw out here real quick is fasting where again fasting is kind of more of a mix. You have a stressor effect of course because there's energy depletion but on top of that you also have some specific effects that are beneficial meaning like with the main one being that you get a lot of relief in the gut which Mike you mentioned this earlier like some people might feel a lot better on a fast and that would be one of the reasons I would say that someone could feel better and so it doesn't really make sense to put that on a spectrum in the same way that we would talk about like exercise because the spectrum that you know we were kind of getting at with exercise is more to do with what you can handle. When it comes to something like fasting, there's going to be like you could have a net benefit or net negative because it depends on how beneficial the the impact of the gut relief is, but it's still never going to be the best intervention for getting that gut relief. It still always comes with a major stressor effect. I shouldn't say never and always, but like nearly is never the best uh approach when it comes to improving the gut and getting gut
relief. And it's always going to come with a pretty significant stressor effect. So again, a lot of nuance here. Um, but hopefully that that helps somebody maybe categorize those things uh in a way that makes sense in their mind. Yeah, really just thinking about the the cumulative effect. And I think a lot of people can tune in to notice is are doing five hit workouts a week. How do they feel? you know, if they're recovering well and they feel amazing, their digestion is fine, their sleep is fine, they still have hair, wonderful, you know, whereas maybe a cold plunge for um really stressed out female, they might be getting signals right away that things are not moving in the right direction. Maybe their cycle gets thrown off. Maybe the rest of the day they're struggling with blood sugar stability and, you know, tuning into the side effects. But I Jay, I'm really glad you mentioned the psychological benefit we get from some of these things because I think that changes the total terrain here. You know, if someone really loves something with maybe harmful specific effects, titrating it and because it is like it is their life and if there's something they love and they they understand, okay, long-distance running maybe has some harm, how can they buffer that in other ways? How can they bolster up their recovery and repair and lower stress in other ways so that they get to do what they love and find genuinely enjoyable? Maybe they're doing it with someone they, you know, there's bond like social bonding that comes with it or they're seeing lots of novelty
running through a beautiful landscape. So spectrum nuance all over this. Mike, what what do you want to add here? I think the problem with the hormetic approach in general, it like collapses everything into this idea of stress as being the primary driver of the benefits. And I think it's actually a I used the word before, it's like an imprecise model because the benefits that you get from like a sauna versus hit versus zone 2 running versus resistance training, the specific they're all from the specific effects to a large extent. There's some areas where you it's hard to unwind the stress component and the response that occurs, but then it's also in those areas it's difficult to to fully claim that the specific effect that's tied to the stress component is actually beneficial. So I'll give a couple examples but in general because you have this model that like a little bit of stress and then the body responding to it provides this benefit and that's formisis that general idea I think is incorrect and it forces you to put everything together in this basket and say rank it and really what you're doing you can try to do that but what you really have to do is for each individual individual intervention for cold plunge sauna whatever the deal is that you need to know what their individual specific effects are. Then you need to know what they're act like how much stress they're generating on the system and then what's that person's context. That's going to be the most
important thing because it's going to be how much are they going to be able to handle? How much is that specific effect that they're getting a benefit in the face of the stress that they have to with endure to to generate that specific effect. And so I'll give a couple examples here what I'm talking about with this. So let's say we take resistance training. So when you do resistance training, it is stressful because you have to expend liberate and expend large amounts of of substrate and produce large amounts of energy because you just massively increase your energetic demand. So you're going to increase stress hormones when when you do resistance training. Now you see cortisol, norepinephrine, growth hormone, whatever. Now the thing is is that the benefit to resistance training? No, that's actually not considered the benefit to resistance training. And the more stress hormones you see was with resistance training, it's technically worse. And then bodybuilders are actually optimizing to not have the stress hormones. They are injecting insulin. They are injecting testosterone and synthetic androgens. And they're trying to keep their cortisol levels and things like this on the lower side, prolactin on the lower side, estradile on the lower side or within an optimal range but not high. So they're actually optimizing for anabolic nonstressed hormones and in including to some extent thyroid hormone in in the this population. So and then when you actually get into the research when you look at the benefits of resistance training it's not that you tear the muscle and it's not that you have the stress hormones. It's that you
have a tensile load an increase of of pressure applied to the muscle tissue that induces a pathway that says hey let's grow this muscle tissue further. So you increase the size of the muscle tissue. So the specific effect of resistance training in terms of increasing your muscle mass is the benefit. The stress hormones and the muscle breakdown, they're now people are actually trying to minimize those things because it's actually starting to to bear out that it's it's more like that's not helpful for the process. If anything, it could be potentially harmful long term for the gains or decrease the amount of gains that you would actually get. So that's where like see that's that's the thing is like you have it h you have a stress to go with it because in order to get the load on the muscle tissue you are going to have to liberate a bunch of substrate and put yourself in a circumstance that requires an increased energy demand but the actual benefit is from the tensile pressure applied to the muscle tissue and so now what you're you have this thing and then the question is in the individual that you are working with what can they actually handle if I have an 80-year - old woman and she's chronically fatigued. She has low bone mass and she hasn't, you know, she hasn't really worked out in an extended period of time. She hasn't gone over 2, 000 steps in a decade. Is is she going to handle a full resistance training routine or is the stress from that resistance training routine, depending on how it's set up, going to crush her system? It's going to crush her system. So, in this context, that's
not an appropriate intervention that she's going to go squat and deadlift and whatever. I can modify the resistance training routine so that she has tensile load on the muscle tissue with decreased metabolic demand and then I can progress it over time. I could do something like that. So this is where you know I'm looking I'm trying you want to be clear on where the benefit is. So then I can optimize for the benefit while minimizing the downside. And un parsing those things apart is very important instead of saying oh it's just stress because then you're going to go try to stress this poor lady out and then she's not going to recover and she never want to go back to the gym again. and her bone mass is going to get worse. So, this is the, you know, there's on top of that. So, it's not just the muscle growth for her, it's the the tensil load on the bones and then it's the keeping the motor neurons active by having her actually work and use the her muscles and her body in general so she maintains her her propriception so she doesn't fall. These are things that are important. Those are the specific effects I'm going for, not stressing her out with HIT workouts. So, this is the this is kind of the this is one example. Another example is the sauna stuff. Do you have there's some circulatory benefits with sauna stuff as Jay pointed to. There's potentially some detoxification benefits depending on the type of sauna you use. If you're using like red and infrared light saunas, there could be mitochondrial benefits. But then on the flip side, some of the other things that people are saying, hey, this is a benefit. the fact that you increase heat shock proteins, it's like it's arguable even in the research is that really a massive benefit or are
and then the other thing is if and you're take in order to actually induce those heat shock proteins, you have to induce protein denaturation. Is it complete denaturation to the point that the peptides are completely untangled? No. But there's enough denaturation that you have to have the response. you have to induce damage to the protein structures of the body to have this clear repair process through the heat shock proteins. So in somebody who's, you know, pretty like say they have chronic fatigue syndrome and they're chronically ill and I'm going to go put them under this this dynamic, I don't think so. I don't know if that's really the best idea given that state. Could a an athlete in the NFL or or just a young guy who who can like smash the sauna or somebody who's generally healthy deal with that effect? Sure. And then they maybe reap the rewards of some of the other things that come with sauna, some of the circulatory benefits, etc. But to say like, oh, the protein denaturation portion is the benefit here. It's like even in the research, it's like maybe mechanistically, but it's not fully clear when you go go through it. And then for some of the other things, the circulatory benefits and stuff like that, it's like yeah, that you know, some of these things could actually be beneficial, but it's like is it because of the stress or it's because of these these specific effects that occur? And again, I think it comes down to the specific effects spec specifically. And so the question is how do we optimize for specific effects without necessarily really driving the stress to high levels? And also you're
looking at that in terms in each person's context. So, am I going to take this 80-year - old woman and cook her in a sauna? Probably not, right? That's not the goal. Could you dare could she use red light therapy and some infrared infrared in the winter and stuff like this and even like not get her body temperature up to super high levels, but heat herself up a little bit with a sauna and have the light exposure and things like this and have some of the circulatory benefit and some of the sweating benefit. Sure, that that's completely that's okay. but like to like try to induce this heat shock response and really get the temperature to high levels. Um, you know, some of these things I would be I'm more would be more careful about. And I think that's why people feel like when we give these answers, it's like um, you know, we're saying it's depends and that's that it's a hedge. It's like it's not that we're trying to hedge. The goal is not necessarily to hedge here. The goal is that there's a contextual component and we're trying to collapse everything into this one model of stress inducing a stress then provides a response and that's the benefit. But I think because the model itself is forcing this perspective that isn't true to what's actually going on. It's collapsing everything into this this dynamic that I think it doesn't really fully explain the circumstance. So that that's where I come from with it and that's why you know I don't think you know for some things like whim I would be on with Jay that I don't think that Wimhof breathing is really ideal. I don't think that cold plunging is really
really ideal. So on one side of the spectrum I would say I I probably wouldn't I wouldn't recommend those and people ask me about them like I'm not really a fan of that. If if somebody wanted to use infrared red light therapy and like maybe there they were in small time in the song, they can handle it fine. But like to spend long like 30 minute sessions getting really high body temps, I think that that would be an issue. Do I think people need to do multiple hit sessions? No. I actually would prefer people go and do resistance training with appropriate loads and appropriate volume that they can recover from and then otherwise just go for walks or like engage in sports and activities. It could be swimming. It could be pickle ball. It could be any of these things that they enjoy and do that as their leisurely activity. So, they're active and less of like you need to crush yourself with HIT. Now, if I have some if I have a guy who's like, look, I have 15 minutes to get this done and I have 15 minutes three days a week. Am I going to create a workout routine that, you know, gets the stuff done as much as I can in 15 minutes for him? If he can handle it, sure, that's fair. So, again, that's where the contextual piece comes in. But on average, yeah, I would say resistance training, walking, sports, these types of activities, more towards the green zone. The sauna and short highintensity workouts more towards the yellow zone. And then your Wimhof breathing and your cold plunges, um, stuff like this more towards the red zone. And then the fasting piece is that's, you know, that's a tool depending on the circumstance, depending on what's going on with a person's gut and stuff like
this. Um, there's one other thing here. It's a little bit of a tangent, but in some of these setups, you see benefits in some of the object like your objective markers, right? So, somebody goes on a fast, their insulin drops, their A1C drops, like all their lipids drop, all this stuff improves. And it's like it does like it actually does improve. And that's in part because of weight loss. And that's also in part because you have a system that's jammed up metabolically in for some of these people. and you're removing that substrate pressure that they're not oxidizing well. That could be fat, carbs, total energy and stuff like this. And so I don't want to deny that those things are there. And even for people doing keto for and and carnivore like you do see that. But I also think that the the one thing that has to be understood in this context is that they arguably will be problematic long term. And then you need to know that there's another side to this stuff. There's a cost to doing things that way. And that's I think what get needs to be brought to the conversation. Yes, you don't eat, you lose weight, metabolic markers improve, but you don't eat, you're gonna create hormonal issues long term. So I don't think this this ends here fully justifies the means that we're going through it, especially because there's other ways to do this to minimize the downside. And that's I think the going to be the most the one of one important piece to consider is for the full picture. Yeah. And even thinking about that, those downsides, I think a lot of people with all the trends and all the ideas of what they should do to be healthy or for longevity.
So often people feel a lot of resistance to doing some of the really stressful things like cold plunging, like these HIT workouts. And I think there's a reason for that. There's a wisdom. The body is saying, "Yeah, you're you're already stressed enough. What about a leisurely stroll with a friend instead?" So paying attention to what actually you want to do, what feels exciting, what feels intrinsically motivating versus where your body is saying, I actually don't want to. I feel like I should, but I really don't want to. I think that can give us a lot of data as to where the where something might be be damaging, really damaging. We're going against the body that's saying please don't, but we're forcing to do it anyways. Um, any anything to add here, Jay, before we shift into hopefully one more, maybe not. Yeah, just a couple other thoughts, a couple other uh a couple things that Mike mentioned. I just wanted to touch on real briefly, you know, and and Teresa, you mentioned this with like hit training versus like taking a nice stroll. And I I think there's like where most people are coming from, people are looking at stressors as the way to health. And normally that's paired with undereating, uh, not getting enough carbs, overdoing protein in a lot of circles, and a body that's like heavily heavily stressed and is in a hypothyroid state. We're dealing with low reproductive hormones and low energy and low mood and trouble sleeping and anxiety and all these signs of that
state. And when we're in that state, reducing these stressors can be really beneficial. And the more intense stressors like hit training can be ones that people were maybe pushing really hard and it makes sense to shy away from. But also I think it's worth highlighting the other side which is with time as we are feeling better as we've been nourished for a while as we're a lot more resilient to stress we can start to incorporate those things again. And again it we want to factor in the enjoyment piece. you know, if you really like doing sprints versus if you hate doing sprints and you really like pickle ball, like both either of those could be good options. And hit training in like a class can be a fine option, too, as long as it isn't excessively stressful for you. And in terms of evaluating that, you can look at your energy and mood through the the rest of the day. You can look at your reproductive hormones, not just in lab work, but in terms of symptoms. You can look at how well you're sleeping, how well you're recovering. And there's a place for for those things. So, I I think especially hit training kind of gets a bad rap, especially in the protabolic space because it's kind of like the poster child of overex exercising and undereating and it's like one of those things that I think a lot of people are um leaning into when they can't handle it. But also, I think doing intense training can be totally fine if you can like when you're at a place where you can handle it. Um, and some of those forms of training, like endurance training, is one that we talk about a lot as one that it's where it's a lot easier to be dipping into the stress side. It's a lot easier to see digestive
issues as a result and hormone issues as a result. And it's one to be careful with, but as you were saying, Teresa, if you really enjoy it, that that's something to consider. And also, it can still be done in a healthy way. It just requires a lot of effort and being intentional as far as your diet and recovery and all of that, but it it can still fit here. Uh just want to be intentional about it. One other thing I want to mention which is that getting into the specific effects also gets murky here and you know Mike you were talking about the benefits in terms of building muscle which is you know there's the stimulation on the muscle that leads to that response and that's definitely one but there's also other specific effects too that are really hard to quantify but we see them in terms of the outcomes like we see a massive benefit of being relatively active and moving consistently throughout the day like even walking or they call it like activities of daily life. It could be doing the laundry and the dishes and uh gardening like just basic things versus being sedentary. There's a huge difference in health outcomes between those two things. Like being sedentary on its own has a lot of negative effects. Even though with the gardening, you're not really getting enough stimulus on the muscle to drive muscle growth. But we're seeing increased circulation. Like there are some myofascial effects that again are really hard to quantify but are likely involved here. Um, I think there's also inherent negative effects of just being sedentary that we're avoiding. But some of these things, again, it is murky and it makes it really hard to kind of create that that spectrum. And I
know, you know, the the in the question Bob was saying, well, saying like overdoing it is a copout. And it's like kind of also the only answer. It's like over exercise is too much exercise. You can't really say like there's a certain amount of exercise that's too much other than what's too much for you. And that's defined by overex exercising. In the same way that uh with sauna like too much is bad and you can't really say anything outside of that. Like some amount can be great um but too much is bad and that too much is going to vary based on the individual. So I think that's why we kind of like the last question. It's spending a lot of time unpacking what we mean by these things and how to evaluate for that that for yourself so that then you can create that that answer. um as opposed to the answer being 10 minutes three times a week is the answer or u you know with this many steps a day is the right amount for everybody or this amount of training is is the right amount for everybody or the style you know there's there's that's why it's important to understand all those nuances. Do we have time for one more? Are we going to have to do another Q & A episode? I think we need another one. I mean I'm I'm glad that we can take some time to give them the attention they deserve. there. Uh yeah, why gloss over the nuance? That's the fun of it, right? So, anyways, for next next Q & A, we've got a lot saved that we can come back to. We do have time for a success story win from a follower. They shared, "Guys, I
went through the entire carnivore rabbit hole for 5 years. Here's what I've learned. As someone who trains calisthenic at a high level, I was always tired. No matter how much fat I ate, I did everything right. Perfect food, perfect electrolyte. But if I'm working an 8 hour shift and training 1 hour, my energy is trash. Gym session is mediocre at best because recovery is extra slow on carnivore since your body is always in a state of stress. My sleep wasn't the best as well because I'm pushing myself as an athlete and I have to work. I'm stacking on way too much stress on my body. You know what fixed it all? Carbs. Reintroducing carbs gave me so much energy. It's insane. It's defin the better energy fuel for our body. You can stay low carb if you want, but humans adapt to carbs for a long time now. And I believe it and believe it or not, it's the better form of energy for your body. Wow. Five years of misery. Oh, clapping for this person. Mike, anything to comment on here? Oh, it's great. I think that I'm happy that this person after 5 years of being in the rabbit hole is willing to give it a try. I think that's very difficult if you've been low carb and or carnivore and you've developed this narrative around that carbs are evil um to shift that is difficult. So, I'm glad that they gave it a try and I'm glad that that they're feeling feeling better overall.
Yeah. Jay, what was your reaction when you got this comment? Yeah. No, I I mean I agree. It's it's uh great to hear that this person's on the other side now. And I think we all always with these comments, we feel for these people. You know, we've we've been there. So, yeah. And also, it's it's funny how this one happened to tie in um a lot with what we were just discussing, you know, the impact of stress. And obviously, if someone's not eating carbs, that what can be overtraining at that point is very different from what could be like overex exercising for someone who's eating a lot of carbs. So yeah, that's um this is a great example of that and awesome that it was a simple fix. You know, it's not like they had extreme overlapping issues. They just needed to fuel their body and you know, even with what seems like a really stressful work um lifestyle, like everything changed. So I Yeah, I love that for this person. Well done. Good for listening to their hunger cues. All right, let's wrap up here and come back to some of these for another episode. Mike, where can people find you? They can find me on my YouTube channel, mike fave, as well as my website, mikefave. com. Awesome. What about you, Jay? My website is jfeldmanwellness. com. Tons of free resources there. And you can find me uh on YouTube at jfelmanwellness and on other social media at JFW Wellness. Awesome. You can find me at LivingrootWellness on Instagram, also on livingrootswwellness. com and tappingwithte which is now linked on livingrootwwellness. com.
All right, thanks everyone for tuning in. We will see you for the next show. Bata for now.
Transcript auto-generated by YouTube. Verbatim — duplicates intentionally preserved.
73 minutes of conversation 87 Reacher quality score
The body adapts to the signals it receives. Heat, cold, compression, strength work, breath, and nutrition all ask a slightly different question of the nervous system. Used well, they create a rhythm: brief stress, clear recovery, better readiness.
sauna therapy raises heart rate, expands blood vessels, and increases thermal load without the joint impact of training. In plain terms, the body practices moving blood and regulating temperature. Many people experience that as easier relaxation, deeper sleep, and a steadier sense of calm after the session.
Cold exposure creates a short, controlled sympathetic response. Breathing slows the reaction. The result is not toughness for its own sake, but a trained transition from alarm back to control. That is why a well-dosed cold plunge can leave the mind clear and the body awake.
Chronic stress is not only a feeling. It changes sleep, pain sensitivity, attention, and the ability to downshift after work. Recovery rooms and short reset protocols matter because they give high-demand workers a reliable way to exit survival mode.
Food timing, protein, fiber, cold, and movement all influence how the body handles energy. The useful frame is not punishment. It is metabolic flexibility: helping the body move between fuel sources while still protecting sleep, strength, and hormonal stability.
The strongest message is restraint. More heat is not automatically better. Colder water is not automatically wiser. A useful protocol has a purpose, a dose, and a recovery window. It should leave you more capable, not depleted.
Recovery works best when the signal is clear, the dose is honest, and the body has room to adapt.
Choose one recovery input at a time, then notice how sleep, mood, soreness, and focus respond.
Keep the dose precise. End sessions while you still feel composed and able to recover.
Pair stress with support: hydration, protein, minerals, breath, and unhurried rest.
The deeper lesson is simple: recovery is not passive. It is a practice of creating the conditions where the body can do its best work.
