Layne Norton Debunks Diet Myths, Elevates Leucine and Energy Balance

Layne Norton破除饮食迷思，强调亮氨酸与能量平衡 每日总能量平衡决定减重效果，而无论蛋白质来自动物还是植物，亮氨酸摄入量都决定了肌肉的保留程度。 Layne Norton博士深入剖析了能量平衡的细胞机制与实际应用，指出尽管“卡路里摄入与消耗”在生物学机制上十分复杂，但追踪每周体重趋势依然是一种高效的工具。他强调蛋白质摄入是维持肌肉和饱腹感的核心饮食杠杆，并讨论了针对动物蛋白与植物蛋白来源的具体阈值策略。此外，对话还破除了围绕非营养性甜味剂、种子油以及一水肌酸补充剂的常见迷思，强调长期的行为可持续性远胜于追求速效的节食法。 虽然“摄入与消耗热量”（CICO）背后的代谢机制极其复杂且食品标签允许最高 20% 的误差，但追踪热量依然有效；在总能量消耗中，蛋白质的食物热效应最高（20%–30%），而 NEAT（非运动活动产热）是个体差异最大且最可调控的消耗环节。 (4:10) 为规避体液波动引起的体重误判，建议每天早晨如厕后称重并追踪 7 天周均值；对于维持与构建肌肉，每日蛋白质摄入在达到约 1.6 g/kg 时效益进入平台期，更高摄入量安全且有助于显著提升饱腹感。 (9:24) 植物蛋白的亮氨酸浓度和生物利用度通常偏低，但通过选择植物分离蛋白、混合互补蛋白源（如玉米蛋白配大豆或豌豆蛋白）或单独补充游离亮氨酸，素食者可达到与动物蛋白完全一致的肌肉蛋白合成效果。 (14:50) 超加工食品的核心风险在于高适口性引发的不自觉热量过量摄入；人体临床试验证实，使用无热量代糖替代含糖饮料能有效减重，且用不饱和脂肪（包括种子油）替代饱和脂肪对心血管健康具有中性至改善作用。 (17:53) 一水肌酸是经过最严谨验证且安全性极高的补剂，每天稳定摄入 5 克即可在 2 至 4 周内完全饱和肌肉磷酸肌酸储备，既往关于其导致脱发或脏器受损的担忧已被科学数据充分辟谣。 (26:50)

Dr. Layne Norton argues that body composition and metabolic health are fundamentally governed by energy balance and adequate protein intake, where behavioral sustainability and whole-diet substitution matter far more than dietary dogma or microscopic supplement optimization. Biochemical Realities of the Energy Balance Equation (0:00) While energy balance is fundamentally governed by calories in versus calories out, Norton explains that both sides involve intricate physiological mechanisms. On the intake side, food labels are legally permitted a 20% margin of error, and metabolizable energy varies because insoluble plant fiber locks nutrients behind indigestible cell walls while individual gut microbiome profiles alter extraction efficiency. Tracking calories remains a viable tool because an individual's metabolic efficiency and label discrepancies remain relatively consistent over time. On the expenditure side, Total Daily Energy Expenditure consists of Resting Metabolic Rate (50% to 70%), the Thermic Effect of Food (TEF; 5% to 10%), and physical movement. Protein requires 20% to 30% of its energy content to process, compared to 5% to 10% for carbohydrates and 0% to 3% for fats. Beyond structured exercise, Non-Exercise Activity Thermogenesis (NEAT)—encompassing subconscious actions like fidgeting and pacing—serves as the most adaptable output variable, diverging by up to 1,000 calories per day between individuals. Protein Targets, Leucine Thresholds, and Plant Sourcing (9:24) Norton identifies protein as the most effective dietary lever for satiety and muscle retention during a caloric deficit. Muscle-building benefits follow an asymptotic curve that plateaus around 1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight daily (0.73 g/lb), yielding diminishing returns up to 2.8 g/kg. Citing a year-long randomized controlled trial by Dr. Jose Antonio, Norton notes that protein intakes up to 4 g/kg caused no adverse health biomarkers while naturally curbing total caloric intake through enhanced fullness. Total daily intake matters far more than meal frequency or distribution. While plant-based diets can support equivalent hypertrophy, whole plants carry lower bioavailability and lower concentrations of leucine, the essential amino acid triggering muscle protein synthesis. In research from Norton's laboratory, wheat and soy proteins failed to stimulate significant muscle protein synthesis under isocaloric and isoproteic conditions, but supplementing wheat with free leucine matched the response of whey. Plant-based dieters can hit necessary amino acid thresholds by consuming protein isolates, using complementary blends such as leucine-dense corn protein combined with pea or soy, or taking free leucine capsules. Norton also references meta-analyses confirming that consuming soy protein once or twice daily does not disrupt testosterone or estrogen levels. Processed Foods, Sweeteners, and Cardiovascular Lipids (17:53) Norton emphasizes that processed foods are not inherently toxic, but they reliably drive involuntary caloric overconsumption. In metabolic ward research by Dr. Kevin Hall, participants consuming an ultra-processed diet spontaneously ate an average of 500 extra calories per day compared to a minimally processed diet. However, for athletes requiring upwards of 4,000 calories daily, ultra-processed options can serve as a practical tool to avoid debilitating gastrointestinal fullness. When evaluating non-nutritive sweeteners and dietary fats, Norton prioritizes human substitution trials over mechanistic hypotheses. Meta-analyses show that replacing sugar-sweetened beverages with diet alternatives reduces HbA1c and facilitates significant fat loss, heavily outweighing theoretical microbiome concerns. Similarly, human randomized controlled trials demonstrate that replacing saturated fats with polyunsaturated or monounsaturated fats yields neutral-to-improved inflammatory markers and lipid profiles. Norton recommends capping saturated fat at 7% to 10% of total calories, cautioning that excessive oils of any type elevate overall caloric intake toward energy toxicity. Weight Tracking, Creatine Efficacy, and Training Consistency (7:43) To prevent psychological discouragement from daily 5-to-6-pound fluid shifts caused by sodium and digestion, Norton advises individuals to weigh themselves every morning after using the bathroom and evaluate seven-day rolling averages. While low-carbohydrate diets often foster rapid initial adherence through transient water loss, long-term success requires sustainable dietary habits rather than unsustainable short-term restrictions. Regarding supplementation, Norton highlights creatine monohydrate as the most rigorously validated ergogenic aid, saturating muscle phosphocreatine stores via 5 grams daily (or 20 grams daily across four doses for a rapid one-week loading phase). He rejects alternative formulations like creatine HCl as unproven and clarifies that liver and kidney concerns are unfounded. Norton also notes that fears regarding hair loss trace to a single, unreplicated 2009 study measuring dihydrotestosterone rather than actual hair loss. Ultimately, Norton stresses that theoretical optimization cannot supersede hard physical training, asserting that lasting progress requires sustained effort in the arena. Norton concludes that nutritional success relies on managing total energy intake through sustainable behavioral habits rather than demonizing specific ingredients. While clinical research establishes clear parameters for protein targets, fat quality, and basic supplementation, long-term body composition changes fundamentally require consistent, demanding physical effort over time.

营养学学者Dr. Layne Norton指出，体成分改善与健康管理的核心在于由严密生物化学机制主导的能量平衡，而非追求极端的饮食流派。他主张以每日能量平衡为底线，配合高蛋白摄入、低加工全食物、经临床检验的基础补剂以及长期的行为一致性，实现可持续的减脂与肌肉维持。 能量平衡模型与每日能量消耗构成 (0:00) 虽然“能量摄入对能量消耗”（CICO）常被批评过于简单，但其底层生化过程高度复杂。摄入端方面，食品标签在法律上允许存在最高20%的误差，且植物性不可溶纤维等成分因包裹在难以消化的细胞壁中，并不完全转化为可代谢能量，人体肠道微生物差异也会影响能量提取效率。尽管如此，Dr. Norton认为个体内部的吸收与标签误差相对恒定，追踪热量仍是有效的管理工具。为排除每日因水分与排泄物引起的5至6磅体重波动，他建议晨起排便后称重并记录7天滚动平均值。 在消耗端，每日总能量消耗（TDEE）由三大要素构成：占50%至70%的基础代谢率（RMR）、占5%至10%的食物热效应（TEF），以及包括主动锻炼和非运动性日常活动产热（NEAT）在内的身体活动。各宏量营养素的TEF差异显著：脂肪消化仅消耗0%至3%的自身能量，碳水化合物为5%至10%，而蛋白质则高达20%至30%。此外，个体间的NEAT差异可达到每日数百甚至上千卡路里，是日常能量支出中最具弹性的变动因素。 蛋白质阈值、肌肉合成与动植物蛋白差异 (9:24) 蛋白质是减脂与体成分重塑中最关键的杠杆，能同时提供高饱腹感并保护瘦体重。Dr. Norton指出，蛋白质对肌肉合成的促进效果在达到每日每公斤体重1.6克后进入平台期，尽管提升至2.4至2.8 g/kg可能带来微弱增益，但边际效益递减。他引用Dr. Jose Antonio的随机对照试验指出，即使摄入高达4 g/kg的极端高蛋白饮食，受试者的健康生物标志物也未见异常，其主要生理效应是饱腹感过强导致自发性热量摄入减少。 关于蛋白质来源，Dr. Norton纠正了“植物蛋白无法高效增肌”的旧观念，但强调完整植物通常伴随较高的碳水化合物或脂肪热量，且亮氨酸（肌蛋白合成的关键触发剂）含量与生物利用度普遍偏低。其实验室研究显示，当向小麦蛋白中外源补充游离亮氨酸至与乳清蛋白匹配时，两者的肌蛋白合成反应完全一致。素食者可通过分离蛋白粉（如大豆或豌豆蛋白分离物）、补充亮氨酸胶囊，或将富含亮氨酸的玉米蛋白与其他植物蛋白互补混合来达到等效效果；荟萃分析亦证实每日摄入一至两次大豆蛋白不会干扰男性或女性的睾酮及雌激素水平。 加工食品、代糖替代效应与脂肪摄入平衡 (17:53) 关于食品质量，Dr. Norton引用Dr. Kevin Hall的代谢病房研究说明，超加工食品本身并非孤立的“毒素”，但其极佳的适口性会导致受试者每天在不经意间多摄入约500卡路里，肥胖的主要根源在于总能量过剩带来的能量毒性。对于非营养性甜味剂（如阿斯巴甜、三氯蔗糖、甜菊糖），系统综述和网络荟萃分析表明，将含糖饮料替换为代糖饮料能显著降低糖化血红蛋白（HbA1c）并减少体脂；相较于代糖对肠道微生态不确定的潜在微调，减重数十磅带来的代谢获益在临床证据上占据绝对主导地位。 在膳食脂肪争议中，针对种子油中多不饱和脂肪酸（PUFA）易氧化致炎的假设，Dr. Norton强调人类随机对照试验并未支持该机制推论。临床数据表明，用多不饱和脂肪或单不饱和脂肪替代饱和脂肪，能中和或改善炎症指标与心血管风险标记物（如LDL胆固醇）。他驳斥了将肥胖归咎于种子油的论点，但告诫无论何种油脂均具有极高能量密度，过量添加会迅速推高热量；同时建议将饱和脂肪控制在每日总摄入热量的7%至10%以内。 一水肌酸的作用机制、安全性与补剂策略 (26:50) 在运动补剂领域，Dr. Norton评价一水肌酸是经过数千项研究验证、兼具最高安全性和有效性的补充剂。肌酸通过完全饱和骨骼肌内的磷酸肌酸（PCr）储备，增强短时间高强度爆发力（ATP-PCr系统），并通过增加肌肉细胞内水合作用直接支持去脂体重增长与训练恢复；新兴证据还显示其在睡眠剥夺状态下对认知功能具有积极作用。相较之下，市场溢价高昂的盐酸肌酸（HCl）等新型衍生物并无实质性优势证据支持。 针对长期流传的副作用，Dr. Norton说明健康人群摄入肌酸导致肝肾受损的说法早已被科学反驳；而导致脱发的担忧源于2009年一项单次且未被成功复现的研究，该研究仅检测到双氢睾酮（DHT）上升，并未直接测量毛囊萎缩或脱发情况。在具体使用上，使用者可选择每日20克（分4次服用）持续1周的冲击期，或采取每日5克、持续2至4周平稳达到饱和；容易出现胃肠道不适的人群则可将5克拆分为每次1至2克随餐分次服用。 Dr. Norton最后强调，没有任何生化理论或微观优化能替代高强度的持续训练与行为执行力。真正的自信无法从理论阅读中获取，唯有在明确目标下直面艰苦的现实挑战并长期投入，才能在改善体成分的同时确立长期可持续的健康习惯。

[0:00] Dr. Layne Norton: When you look at what actually makes up calories in, calories out, it's actually very complicated [7:43] Dr. Layne Norton: You can't create a new version of yourself while dragging your old habits and behaviors behind you. [12:29] Dr. Layne Norton: If you look at the actual outcomes, looking at testosterone, there was a recent meta-analysis looking at soy... using it like once or twice a day doesn't seem to have an effect on testosterone or estrogen. [30:13] Dr. Layne Norton: You can't outscience hard training.

[0:00] Welcome to Huberman Lab Essentials, [0:02] where we revisit past episodes for the [0:04] most potent and actionable science-based [0:06] tools for mental health, physical [0:08] health, and performance. [0:11] I'm Andrew Huberman and I'm a professor [0:13] of neurobiology and opthalmology at [0:16] Stanford School of Medicine. And now for [0:18] my discussion with Dr. Lane Norton. Dr. [0:20] Norton, thank you so much for being [0:22] here. This is a long time coming and I [0:23] have to say as a fellow PhD scientist, I [0:26] feel a great kinship with you. I know [0:28] you have tremendous experience in in [0:31] fitness and nutrition in a number of [0:32] areas. I'd like to start um with [0:35] something that's rather basic and yet [0:36] can be pretty complex and that's this [0:38] issue of energy balance and energy [0:41] utilization. What happens when we eat [0:43] food of any kind and how is that [0:46] actually converted into energy as a way [0:48] of framing up the discussion around [0:50] weight loss, weight maintenance, weight [0:52] gain and body composition? It's a great [0:55] question and like you said this is one [0:57] of those things where you know people [0:58] use the term calories in calories out [1:00] and they say well that's way too [1:02] simplistic and I'm like if you look at [1:04] what actually makes up calories in [1:06] calories out it's actually very [1:08] complicated. So a calorie just refers to [1:11] a unit of energy of heat specifically. [1:14] Really what you're talking about is the [1:16] potential chemical energy that is in the [1:19] bonds of the macronutrients of food, [1:22] right? And by digesting, assimilating [1:25] and metabolizing those nutrients, we are [1:29] able to create energy. The inroduct of [1:31] that mostly is ATP, adenazin [1:34] triphosphate, which is your body's [1:36] energy currency. So a lot of metabolism [1:40] is simply creating ATP. Protein's a [1:43] little bit different because protein uh [1:46] gets converted to amino acids which can [1:47] be used for muscle protein synthesis or [1:50] protein synthesis in other tissues. Uh [1:53] but it also can be converted through [1:54] glucanogenesis to glucose and there also [1:58] are some ketogenic amino acids as well. [2:00] Then you have fatty acids which are able [2:03] to create energy through what's called [2:06] beta oxidation where essentially you're [2:08] taking these fatty acids and you're [2:09] lpping them off two carbons at a time to [2:11] produce acetal coa which again can go [2:13] into the KB cycle produce those hydrogen [2:16] ions that can then power the production [2:18] of ATP. So that's kind of like at the [2:20] cellular level of how this stuff works. [2:23] But stepping back and taking it back out [2:26] like what does that have to do with [2:27] weight loss or weight gain, right? When [2:29] you think about the balance of energy in [2:31] versus energy out, sounds very simple. [2:33] But let's look at what actually makes up [2:35] energy in versus energy out. First of [2:38] all, you've got to realize that the [2:40] energy inside of the equation is more [2:43] difficult to track than people think. [2:44] So, one, food labels, which we like to [2:47] think is being, you know, like from upon [2:50] high, uh, can have up to a 20% error in [2:53] them. [2:53] >> Really? [2:54] >> Oh, yeah. The second aspect is there's [2:56] what's called your energy but then [2:57] there's also metabolizable energy right [2:59] so if you have uh food stuff with say a [3:01] lot of insoluble fiber typically [3:03] insoluble fiber uh is not really [3:05] digestible and so you could have you [3:07] know quite a bit of carbohydrate but if [3:10] you can't extract the energy from it and [3:12] typically this is because insoluble [3:14] fiber from like plant material [3:16] the carbohydrate or and even some of the [3:19] protein is bound up in the uh plant [3:22] structure which makes makes it [3:24] inaccessible to digestive enzymes. And [3:26] so this is what like adds bulk to your [3:28] school stool and whatnot, but again [3:30] reduces the metabolizable energy in [3:32] there. And there's some evidence that [3:34] based on people's individual gut [3:37] microbiome that some people may actually [3:39] be better at extracting energy out of [3:43] fiber compared to other people. So just [3:46] starting off right there, okay, there's [3:48] there's quite a bit of play in the [3:50] energy inside of things. Now, one of the [3:52] things people will say is, "Well, see, [3:54] that's why you shouldn't worry about [3:55] tracking calories, cuz you know, if the [3:56] food labels can be 20% off and what I'll [3:59] say is, okay, I understand where you're [4:01] coming from, but typically if it's off, [4:03] it's going to be consistently off." And [4:04] if you're consistent with how you track [4:06] it, eventually you'll be able to know [4:09] kind of what you're taking in. So, now [4:10] let's look at the energy out side of the [4:12] equation, which is actually way more [4:13] complicated, right? And so, your energy [4:15] out is a few different uh buckets. The [4:19] first one and the biggest one is your [4:22] resting metabolic rate. So your arm rar [4:24] that for most people is anywhere from 50 [4:26] to 70% of your total daily energy [4:28] expenditure. Sedentary people will be on [4:31] the higher end of that. So it'll be a [4:32] bigger proportion. Whereas people who [4:34] are more active it'll be a little bit [4:35] lower. Not because their metabolic rate [4:37] is lower but because they're expending a [4:39] greater percentage of their calories [4:40] from physical activity. Then you have [4:42] something called the thermic effect of [4:44] food which is a relatively small [4:46] percentage of your total daily energy [4:47] expenditure. It's about 5 to 10%. Very [4:50] difficult to measure. And usually what [4:51] researchers do when they're kind of [4:53] looking at this stuff is they just kind [4:54] of make an assumption about it. They use [4:56] a constant. And that refers to the [4:58] amount of energy it takes to extract the [5:01] energy out of food. You can't just eat [5:03] food and then you know it just appears [5:05] in your cells and you start doing stuff. [5:08] It has to be systematically broken down [5:10] and put into forms that can actually [5:12] produce energy. A lot of times people [5:14] will say something like, well, not all [5:16] calories are created equal. That's not [5:19] true because calories is just a unit of [5:21] measurement, right? That would be like [5:22] saying not all seconds on a clock are [5:24] created equal. Yes, they are. All [5:27] sources of calories may have [5:29] differential effects on energy [5:31] expenditure and appetite. So if we look [5:32] at something like fat for example, the [5:35] TEF of fat is about 0 to 3%. Meaning if [5:38] you eat 100 calories from fat, your net [5:40] will be about 97 to 100. So the process [5:43] of breaking down that fat essentially [5:45] subtracts some of the the calories away [5:48] because you used it in creating energy [5:51] correct by breaking those chemical bonds [5:52] to create ATP. [5:53] >> Correct. Okay. Correct. Fat is actually [5:55] the easiest thing to convert into [5:56] energy. [5:57] >> Then you have carbohydrate which has a [5:59] TF of like 5 to 10%. So you eat 100 [6:02] calories from carbohydrate and obviously [6:03] like the fiber content makes a big [6:05] difference on this. But if you eat 100 [6:07] calories you'll net 90 to 95. protein is [6:10] about a 20 to 30% TEF. So if you eat 100 [6:13] calories from protein, you're only [6:15] netting 70 to 80. Now you're still net, [6:18] you know, people say, well, you can't [6:19] eat too much protein. Well, you know, [6:21] people will ask, well, can protein be [6:22] stored as fat? The carbons from protein, [6:25] it's unlikely it's going to wind up in [6:26] atapost tissue, but if you're eating a [6:27] lot of protein overall as part of a lot [6:29] of calories, it has to be oxidized and [6:31] it can provide a calorie cushion for [6:32] other things to be stored in fat. But [6:35] protein itself does provide you know a [6:37] net positive for calories but less so [6:39] than carbohydrate or fat and tends to be [6:42] more satiating. So again when people [6:44] talk about you know are all calories [6:45] created equal yes but all sources of [6:47] calories may have differential effects [6:48] on energy expenditure and appetite. So [6:51] that's the TEF bucket and the BMR [6:53] bucket. Then we go to physical activity. [6:56] And physical activity is essentially two [6:57] parts. There's exercise which is kind of [7:00] your purposeful movements like you go [7:02] out for a walk, you do a training [7:04] session, I mean whatever any purposeful [7:08] activity and then you have what's called [7:09] NEAt which is non-ex exercise activity [7:11] thermogenesis. So for example if I when [7:14] I'm talking if I'm waving around my [7:15] hands if I'm tapping my feet if I'm [7:17] whatever that's NEAt the calorie burn [7:21] from NEAT is actually pretty [7:22] significant. We're not talking about 100 [7:24] calories or 200 calories per day. We're [7:26] talking about in some cases hundreds of [7:28] thousands, excuse me, hundreds to maybe [7:31] even close to a thousand calories per [7:33] day. [7:33] >> And what's very interesting about NEAt [7:35] is that seems to be the most modifiable [7:38] of, you know, BMR, TEF, and NEAt. NEAt [7:41] seems to be far more modifiable. The [7:43] next thing is a lot of people weigh very [7:45] sporadically. And I'll tell people like [7:47] if you're going to make intentional [7:48] weight loss a goal and again this can be [7:50] different for different people but [7:52] typically I tell people weigh in first [7:54] thing in the morning right after you go [7:55] to the bathroom do it every day and take [7:57] the average of that for the week and [7:59] then compare that to the next week's [8:01] average as somebody who weighs [8:02] themselves pretty pretty regularly. I [8:05] mean my weight will fluctuate you know [8:07] five six pounds and not seemingly [8:09] changing much you know and that's just [8:11] you know those short-term changes are [8:13] fluid. So, if you're somebody who just [8:16] randomly is weighing in and you're [8:18] eating at a calorie deficit and you just [8:21] weigh in one day where you just whatever [8:23] reason holding some more fluid, then you [8:25] go, "Oh, see this isn't working." When [8:27] in reality, your average might be [8:29] dropping. Weight fluctuations are [8:30] actually identified as a major reason [8:32] why people get discouraged from weight [8:34] loss. It kind of stops the buy in, you [8:36] know, when they have a fluctuation up. [8:37] So, that's one of the reasons one of the [8:39] reasons early on that low carb diets [8:41] tend to work really well is because [8:42] people lose a lot of water weight. [8:43] really quickly and they get that buy in. [8:45] So, oh, this is working. People think [8:47] about I'm going to do a diet and I'm [8:49] going to lose this weight and they do [8:51] not give any thought to what happens [8:53] afterwards. Think about if you have some [8:54] kind of chronic disease or a diabetic, [8:57] right? You you can't just take insulin [8:58] once and that's it, right? You got to [9:00] take it continuously otherwise you're [9:03] going to have problems. You can't create [9:04] a new version of yourself while dragging [9:06] your old habits and behaviors behind [9:08] you. So, what I'll tell people is [9:10] because people say, "Well, I'm doing a [9:13] carnivore diet or I'm doing this diet or [9:15] that diet." And I'll say, "That's fine. [9:17] Do you see yourself doing that for the [9:18] rest of your life?" And if the answer is [9:20] no, you probably need to rethink what [9:22] your approach is going to be. Could you [9:24] briefly talk about how macronutrients, [9:27] including protein, impact satiety from [9:30] the standpoint of somebody who, for [9:31] instance, would like to quote unquote [9:33] lose a few pounds, right? probably would [9:36] be happy to gain a little bit of lean [9:37] body mass provided it was in a [9:39] particular location on their body. That [9:40] seems to be a a thing now, directed [9:42] hypertrophy, if you will. And how much [9:45] they should focus on protein as a core [9:48] component of creating this diet. And are [9:51] animal sources of protein indeed more [9:53] bioavailable? That's a tricky word for [9:56] sake of muscle building, but also for [9:57] sake of somebody who just would like to [9:59] lose body fat. They don't want to lose [10:01] muscle and they'd like to bring their [10:02] weight down a few pounds. of the [10:03] macronutrients, protein is definitely [10:05] the biggest lever that you can pull [10:06] because even if you know it doesn't take [10:08] a ton of protein to get a lot of the [10:10] muscle building benefits. I mean, I [10:11] think the benefits really start to [10:13] plateau out around 1.6 g per kilogram of [10:16] body weight. There's some evidence that [10:18] maybe even up to like 2.4 or 2.8 g per [10:21] kilo may give like a little bit more [10:24] benefit. I think it probably looks [10:25] something like an asmtope in terms of a [10:27] curve where as you put more into the [10:30] system you always get a little bit more [10:32] but it just gets to the point where it's [10:33] so infantessimally small benefit that [10:35] it's for all intents of purposes no [10:38] benefit. There doesn't seem to be really [10:39] downsides to it even like up to very [10:41] high levels of protein. in Jose Antonio [10:43] did a study that was a year-long [10:45] randomized control trial and again it's [10:47] just one year but they were looking at [10:48] all sorts of different biioarkers and [10:51] basically even up to like four grams per [10:53] kilogram of protein they couldn't really [10:55] find any negative health outcomes from [10:57] it other than people were just so [10:59] satiated they ended up eating less [11:00] calories. So protein is a big lever [11:03] because one, it has a higher thermic [11:06] effect of food. So you're getting a [11:07] little bit more calorie burn per day, [11:08] even though it's not a ton because TEF [11:11] is a pretty small percentage of your [11:12] overall energy expenditure, but still a [11:15] benefit. You're getting the effects on [11:17] lean body mass. It's going to, if you're [11:18] in a diet, it's going to help preserve [11:19] lean body mass. If you're at [11:21] maintenance, it's going to help build or [11:22] preserve lean body mass. And if you're [11:23] in a surplus, it's going to help build [11:25] or preserve lean body mass. If I'm going [11:27] to eat, let's say, two grams um per [11:29] kilogram of body weight protein and I'm [11:31] not eating multiple meals per maybe I'm [11:33] eating two or three meals per day, I'm [11:35] certainly going to be eating more than [11:37] the 30 gram threshold that was thrown [11:39] around for a long time that we can only [11:40] assimilate 30 grams of protein per meal. [11:42] Should I just not worry about that? Some [11:44] of it is going to go towards the thermic [11:45] uh effect of food. Uh some of that might [11:48] be converted into glucose of all things [11:50] through gluconioenesis. So, should I [11:52] worry about this 30 gram cut off? [11:53] Because I think balancing the the 1.6 [11:56] gram per kilogram body weight threshold [11:58] with number of meals with the need to [12:00] exercise and work and live my life and [12:01] sleep, etc. Pretty soon you you you run [12:03] into bottlenecks where you just can't do [12:05] it all or you're spending so much time [12:07] trying to focus on all [12:07] >> you can't optimize all the things at the [12:09] same time. [12:10] >> You lose your mind and your body. Most [12:12] Americans get about 65 to 70% of their [12:15] protein at dinner, right? Breakfast [12:16] tends to be pretty minimal protein. So [12:19] to answer your question, I do think that [12:21] timing and frequency matters a little. [12:23] Not so much frequency, but distribution [12:25] more so, but it's a it's a much smaller [12:27] lever than just getting enough total [12:28] protein in. And then as far as like [12:30] animal versus plant, I used to be in the [12:33] camp of there's no way somebody can [12:35] build as much muscle on a plant-based [12:36] diet. And now I think I've come back to [12:39] you can. It just requires a little bit [12:41] more planning. And I don't want to say [12:43] always, but it's very difficult to do [12:46] without an isolated source of protein. [12:48] So unless you're going to supplement [12:49] with an isolated plant source of [12:50] protein, it's very difficult to get [12:53] enough without going over on total [12:55] calories because you can figure that [12:57] especially like take somebody who may be [12:58] calorically restricted trying to get [13:00] enough protein from whole intact plant [13:02] sources. So you've got a few different [13:04] things working against you. One, the [13:06] sources of protein you're consuming also [13:08] have carbohydrate and or fat. Two, it's [13:10] a less bioavailable form of protein. And [13:13] three, it's a lower quality of protein [13:14] in terms of it has typically less [13:16] lucine, less branching amino acids, and [13:18] less essential amino acids. [13:19] >> You answered the question that I almost [13:21] interrupted you to ask, which was does [13:23] it boil down to the leucine content? And [13:25] um it sounds like that is one of the [13:27] components and that uh a lot of the [13:29] vegan and vegetarian sources of [13:31] excellent protein that excellent protein [13:34] vegetarian or vegan source is [13:36] co-packaged with calories from [13:38] carbohydrates and or fat that make it [13:40] hard to stay stay under the caloric [13:42] threshold whereas a steak is I'm not and [13:44] obviously for people might want to avoid [13:46] that for ethical reasons but that's a [13:48] different matter entirely but a steak or [13:50] a piece of chicken or an egg is well an [13:52] egg you know has a yolk which is there's [13:54] fat there, but is almost a pure protein [13:57] fat source. There's no carbohydrate [13:59] along for the ride. [14:00] >> You know, you can do it. Takes a little [14:01] more planning and you're almost always [14:03] if you're a vegan especially, you're [14:05] going to be better off like [14:06] supplementing with some isolated form of [14:08] protein or vegan form of protein. Now, [14:10] this is where it gets into people say, [14:12] well, what about the limiting amino [14:13] acids and those sorts of things? It's a [14:16] consideration. Some of the better forms [14:18] of vegan protein in terms of amino acid [14:21] content are like soy. Now I can [14:23] everybody hear everybody screaming [14:25] online about their testosterone levels [14:27] in terms of actual outcomes and looking [14:29] at testosterone. There was a recent meta [14:31] analysis looking at soy and I think if [14:35] it's your only source of protein then [14:38] maybe the dosage is high enough to cause [14:39] some weird effects but if you're just [14:41] using it like once or twice a day [14:43] doesn't seem to have an effect on [14:44] testosterone or estrogen. So that can be [14:46] a decent source of protein because it is [14:48] a complete protein source. Um it does [14:50] have a pity cause of one which picaus is [14:52] basically a uh a measure of [14:56] protein quality based on does it provide [15:00] enough of all the amino acids so that [15:02] none are limiting and so soy is one of [15:04] the only vegan sources that does that. [15:06] Interestingly potato protein isolate [15:08] actually has a similar essential amino [15:11] acid content to whey. So isolated potato [15:13] protein it's just really hard to find. [15:15] Another reason using an isolated protein [15:17] can be helpful is because it's more [15:19] bioavailable as well when it's been [15:21] isolated out. When it's the protein [15:23] bound up in the actual plant material, [15:25] it tends to be less bioavailable. Now, [15:27] cooking can help increase the [15:28] bioavailability because it breaks some [15:30] of those bonds and and whatnot. The [15:31] other thing to consider with the vegan [15:33] sources of protein is the lucine [15:35] content. So one of the studies we did [15:37] was we looked at wheat, soy, egg and [15:40] whey is nitrogenous meaning we equated [15:43] protein between the groups isocoric. We [15:46] equated calories and we looked at muscle [15:49] protein synthesis and I think this was [15:52] the meals were 15% of total energy from [15:54] protein. So like a like your food guide [15:57] pyramid level of protein. uh and we saw [16:00] that in the wheat and soy group uh they [16:03] did not increase muscle protein [16:04] synthesis but the egg and whey group [16:07] increased muscle protein synthesis. Now [16:09] what's really interesting is we went [16:11] back and we took wheat and added free [16:14] leucine to it to match the leucine [16:16] content of whey and the protein [16:18] synthetic response was identical. [16:20] >> So again I I don't like to simplify [16:22] things too much but leucine appears to [16:26] really be driving this ship. a few [16:28] different options for the vegan folks [16:30] out there. You can use an isolated [16:31] source of of protein. And again, like [16:33] there's going to be good options coming [16:35] because this plant-based way is going to [16:36] be a great option for folks. You can add [16:38] free lucine to it to whatever your [16:41] source of protein is. [16:42] >> Just buy supplemented lucine. Now, it [16:45] tastes horrible. It's completely [16:47] non-polar. Does not dissolve in anything [16:50] capsules. [16:50] >> Gross. It can't be put into capsules. [16:52] Yeah. So, you could take a capsule. For [16:54] example, if you're eating your normal [16:56] meal, you could just take a capsule of [16:58] like one gram of lucine. It's probably [16:59] going to bump you up, bump you up enough [17:01] that you're going to be good to go. [17:03] There's options like blends, especially [17:05] with corn. Corn is actually very high in [17:07] lucine as a percentage of its protein. [17:10] Now, you got to remember like you go eat [17:12] corn on a cob and you're getting like [17:13] two grams of total protein. So, it's not [17:15] that much leucine. But if you isolate [17:17] out the protein, put it into a powder, [17:19] well now you know when you're getting [17:21] like 80 90% of the weight is now [17:23] protein. Corn is actually about 12% [17:25] leucine in terms of the protein. So a [17:28] great source of leucine. It is like [17:30] almost frank deficient in some other [17:31] amino acids, but you can blend it with a [17:33] few other sources of protein like you [17:35] could blend it with a soy, a pea, and [17:37] you can create these complimentary [17:39] blends that would actually have quite a [17:41] bit of leucine but also some of the [17:42] other essential amino acids. So, there [17:44] are options out there for plant-based [17:45] folks. And I mean, we have seen people [17:48] who are plant-based build impressive [17:50] amounts of muscle. There's quite a few [17:51] bodybuilders that are plant-based. Can [17:53] we come up with a relatively short [17:56] summary of the following? Tell me if [17:58] this is um correct or not. That most of [18:01] us should be focused on ingesting [18:04] non-processed and minimally processed [18:06] foods. [18:07] >> I would 100% agree with what you said [18:09] that trying to focus on minimally [18:11] processed foods is very important. The [18:13] one caveat I would say is I think it's [18:15] important to understand why processed [18:17] food just gets people to spontaneously [18:19] eat more. Uh Kevin Hull showed this in [18:22] his study that was I mean very I mean he [18:24] designed some of the most elegant [18:25] studies in nutrition. They basically [18:27] took people from a minimally processed [18:29] food diet and then gave them access to [18:32] ultrarocessed foods very few [18:34] instructions just eat till you feel [18:36] satisfied and they spontaneously [18:37] increase their calorie intake by 500 [18:39] calories a day. That's massive. Now, [18:41] that being said, it depends on the [18:43] individual and their goals. If your goal [18:45] is to, for example, build muscle or [18:47] maintain a high body weight for a sport, [18:49] for example, like an NFL offensive [18:51] lineman or or something of that nature, [18:53] your protein, your fiber, your [18:55] micronutrients, these are your [18:57] responsibilities. But those become much [18:59] easier to hit when you have higher [19:00] calories. If you're eating 4,000 [19:02] calories a day for whatever goal you [19:04] have, you're probably going to have some [19:05] left over. And like good luck eating [19:09] 4,000 calories from minimally processed [19:11] foods. You quite frankly you'll be [19:13] miserable because you're you're going to [19:15] have such gut fill that you're going to [19:17] feel like you can't even move. And so [19:19] that's why I'm so pedantic and a [19:21] stickler about saying, "Okay, yes, it's [19:23] a good idea to eat a minimally processed [19:25] food and try to avoid processed foods, [19:28] but not because processed foods are bad [19:31] per se, but what the outcome tends to be [19:35] from a lot of processed food [19:36] consumption, which is over consuming [19:38] calories and then therefore, you know, [19:40] energy toxicity negatively contributing [19:42] to your health." This I think is a [19:44] perfect segue for something that [19:46] >> first brought us together [19:49] which was you know which was this this [19:51] thing about artificial sweeteners. [19:52] Artificial sweeteners are many things. [19:54] So I'd like to talk about their effects [19:55] on blood sugar [19:57] >> in the acute sense and then the gut [20:00] microbiome data I think are interesting [20:02] enough to discuss. I have changed my [20:04] view on artificial sweeteners based on [20:06] what you've taught me. So, this is a [20:08] case where I've completely changed my [20:09] view, which is that I don't have any [20:12] problem with them whatsoever based on [20:14] the current data, which is not to say [20:16] that I'm, you know, gulping down cupfuls [20:18] of sucralose, but I feel okay ingesting [20:21] some stevia and some aspartame and I'm [20:24] not too worried about it. [20:25] >> We have to think about again the [20:27] hierarchy of importance, right? And what [20:29] are you replacing with? There is no [20:31] situation where it is not a net positive [20:33] to take somebody who drinks sugar [20:35] sweetened beverages and have them drink [20:36] an artificially sweetened beverage. like [20:39] the in the meta analysis there was [20:40] actually a recent network meta analysis [20:42] looking at like markers of ataposity [20:46] um you know HBA1C a bunch of different [20:48] health markers and when you substitute [20:51] you know uh uh we'll call it [20:53] non-nutritive sweeteners since stevia is [20:55] not artificial but so when you [20:57] substitute N&S [20:59] for the sugar sweetened beverages you [21:02] see improvements in a lot of different [21:04] things and whenever I post about [21:05] non-nutritive sweeteners in the comments [21:07] there's There's always one or two or [21:09] three people who say, "All I did was cut [21:12] out soda and I drank diet soda instead [21:14] and I lost 50 pounds or I lost 75 [21:16] pounds. I even had one person say I lost [21:18] 100 pounds. That's the only thing I [21:19] did." [21:19] >> Wow. [21:19] >> I mean, that's a pretty massive lever to [21:21] pull if you consider somebody who might [21:22] be having like I mean five or six cokes [21:24] a day. We're talking a serious amount of [21:26] calories. Is that obese person who lost [21:28] 100 pounds by doing that, do I really [21:31] care about maybe a small alteration to [21:33] their gut microbiome? No. because their [21:35] gut microbiome is actually much more [21:37] healthy now by them having lost all that [21:39] excess atapost tissue. So I think it's [21:41] one of those things that again it [21:44] depends on the situation right like if [21:45] somebody's obese and they said well this [21:47] is going to help me you know eliminate [21:49] sugar sweetened beverage like why would [21:51] you want to take that tool away from [21:52] them like that's a a great lever to pull [21:54] I mean if somebody can lose literally [21:56] 100 pounds from just one change in [21:59] lifestyle that's not even really that [22:01] inconvenient of a change that is [22:03] powerful but again is it the most [22:05] healthy thing they could do and I think [22:06] that's kind of like what tends to get [22:08] asked we don't know is it healthier than [22:10] water [22:12] probably not maybe as healthy as it who [22:16] knows but I really make all those [22:18] caveats because you don't want to have [22:20] people who could use this as a tool [22:23] think well no I can't do this because [22:24] it's actually bad for me [22:25] >> right [22:26] >> if it helps you lose 50 lbs or 75 pounds [22:28] or whatever it is trust me it's not bad [22:30] for you [22:31] >> seed oils there are a number of folks [22:34] out there who are arguing that seed oils [22:36] are the source of you know the obesity [22:38] epidemic everything. And then there are [22:41] those that would argue just the opposite [22:43] um that you know meat is the source of [22:45] all problems etc. And I think we've [22:47] appropriately framed things that it's [22:48] never that black and white. It's simply [22:50] not. Are there any data on seed oils? [22:53] The first thing I'll say is seed oils [22:56] have have negatively contributed to our [22:58] overall health because people in the [23:01] last you know 20 30 years what they have [23:04] tend to add into their diet that has [23:06] increase the overall calorie load is oil [23:08] mostly from seed oils but when we look [23:10] at like onetoone replacement with other [23:14] fats and so I if you look at the [23:16] epidemiology yeah you can find some [23:18] epidemiology showing people who consume [23:20] more seed oil have more negative health [23:22] outcomes comes problem is again tied up [23:25] with a multitude of other behaviors. [23:27] And then you can find mechanisms and the [23:29] the idea is well they're polyunsaturated [23:32] which means in the fatty acid chain [23:35] there's multiple double bonds which [23:37] those double bonds can be oxidized uh [23:39] when they're exposed to heat and some [23:42] other things. And so the idea is well [23:44] when you cook with these things and they [23:46] may get oxidized and that's going to [23:47] cause inflammation in your body. That's [23:49] a a plausible mechanism. So, as always, [23:53] I defer to the human randomized control [23:56] trials. What you tend to find when you [23:58] substitute saturated fats for [23:59] polyunsaturated fats, inflammation is [24:02] basically neutral. There there's some [24:04] studies that show a positive effect of [24:06] doing polyunsaturated fats, but it [24:08] probably depends on the individual [24:09] polyunsaturated fat. And that's the [24:11] other thing I don't really is difficult [24:13] because you're you're categorizing like [24:15] everything in this one bucket and there [24:17] are some differences between individual [24:19] fatty acids. Even with saturated fat [24:21] like for example steic acid doesn't tend [24:23] to raise LDL cholesterol whereas you [24:26] know saturated fat as a whole tends to [24:28] raise LDL cholesterol but there are some [24:30] saturated fats that don't. So again it's [24:32] like we're putting things in buckets and [24:34] it's a little more nuanced than that. Uh [24:36] then if you look at the effects of know [24:38] polyunsaturated fats on markers of [24:41] cardiovascular disease again tends to [24:44] either be a neutral or positive effect [24:45] when you substitute saturated fat for [24:48] polyunsaturated fat. Now if you want to [24:51] get into like monounsaturated versus [24:52] polyunsaturated there's quite a bit of [24:54] disagreement between the studies. What I [24:56] would say based on the human randomized [24:58] control trials is that you're probably [25:02] better off consuming monounsaturated and [25:04] polyunsaturated in place of saturated [25:07] fat. But again, if the idea is, well, [25:10] that means polyunsaturated are good for [25:12] me. So, I'm just going to dump a bunch [25:13] of oil on everything and now you're [25:15] upping your calories. Well, that's [25:16] that's that's a negative now, right? [25:18] Because you have to deal with the bigger [25:19] problem of overall energy toxicity. So, [25:21] I'm not somebody who likes to demonize [25:23] individual nutrients. I just haven't [25:25] seen really compelling evidence that [25:27] seed oils are the root cause of the [25:30] problems that are being suggested. And I [25:32] think this is a good example of kind of [25:34] like whenever there's a something that [25:37] pops up in the fitness industry, there's [25:39] always like the opposite thing that pops [25:40] up and is like the reactionary, you [25:42] know, extreme reaction to whatever this [25:46] thing was over here. And I think that's [25:47] what we're seeing with some of the seed [25:48] oil stuff. It's mostly people who are [25:50] trying to kind of expose the virtues of [25:53] saturated fat. I think it's fine to [25:54] consume sims saturated fat, but I think [25:58] limiting it to seven to 10% of your [26:00] daily calorie intake is probably wise [26:03] again based on the consensus of the [26:05] evidence I've seen. And so once again, [26:08] like we're we're struggling with this. [26:09] Okay, we've got this epidemiology and [26:11] these mechanisms that sound good, but [26:14] then what actually happens when we we do [26:16] some human randomized control trials and [26:18] and so far I just haven't seen the [26:20] evidence to suggest that seed oils are [26:24] independently bad for you independent of [26:27] the calories they contain. I think we [26:29] all have this idea that there's this one [26:31] iconic diet out there that is going to [26:34] be the best diet for building muscle and [26:36] burning fat and uh preventing cancer and [26:39] heart disease. And the reality is like [26:41] there's overall healthy dietary patterns [26:43] that we see that are good for those [26:45] things. But when we get down into the [26:47] weeds, there's probably some push and [26:49] pull here as well. I'd [26:50] >> like to ask you about supplements for a [26:52] moment. one that I'm very familiar with [26:54] which is creatine monohydrate not just [26:56] for muscle building but maybe any other [26:58] purposes for it. [26:59] >> It is the most tested safe and effective [27:03] sport supplement we have. I mean it's [27:05] just there are thousands of studies on [27:07] creatin monohydrate now. I would say [27:09] very clearly too if you're using any [27:11] other form of creatin I think you're [27:12] wasting your money. Creatine [27:13] hydrochloride has some hype around it. [27:16] It's in it's apparently it's a little [27:17] more soluble. Um the claim is that you [27:19] need less but there's only a couple [27:21] studies on it and it's more expensive. [27:23] So I tell people just take creatine [27:25] monohydrate. It is tried and true. It's [27:27] been shown to saturate the muscle cells [27:29] 100% with phosphocreatin and that's what [27:32] you want. So creatin uh works through a [27:35] few different methodologies. One through [27:37] increasing phosphocreatin content which [27:38] helps improve exercise performance. It [27:40] appears to improve recovery and it [27:44] increases lean mass [27:46] a lot of which is through bringing water [27:49] into the muscle cells but that is I mean [27:52] muscle cells are mostly water. So when [27:54] people say well it's just water that's [27:56] what muscle cells mostly are and it also [27:58] increases strength and some other [28:01] metrics. Now it also has been shown in [28:03] studies that people tend to get a [28:05] decrease in body fat percentage. Now, [28:07] that's probably because they're getting [28:08] an increase in lean mass. And so, the [28:10] relative is a decrease in body fat [28:12] percentage. But there are a few studies [28:14] that show a decrease in fat mass as [28:15] well. I don't think that creatin is a [28:17] fat burner. I think that people are able [28:18] to train harder, build more lean tissue, [28:20] and so that's probably having an effect [28:22] on fat mass. Then, they've actually [28:24] shown more recently some cognitive [28:25] benefits to creatin, which I find really [28:27] interesting as well. But the only knock [28:30] on creatin that anybody's been able to [28:31] come up with because they've they've [28:32] debunked the kidney stuff. They've [28:34] debunked the liver stuff. It there's no [28:36] evidence that it harms healthy kidney or [28:38] liver is hair loss. So what about hair [28:40] loss? Because there was one study in [28:42] 2009 that showed that creatin increased [28:44] DHT. But they didn't really show an [28:47] effect on any other sex hormone. So it's [28:50] kind of strange like you would think if [28:51] there was an increase in DHT there would [28:53] be like something else that changes as [28:55] well. And it's only one study and again [28:58] didn't directly measure hair loss [29:00] measured DHT which we know is involved [29:02] in the loss of the follicule the [29:04] follicle. [29:06] So what I would say is that I am not [29:08] convinced it's only one study never been [29:10] replicated to my knowledge and it was [29:12] looking at a mechanism rather than an [29:13] outcome. Do you emp emphasize the [29:16] classic loading of creatine? Taking it a [29:18] bunch of times per day and then backing [29:20] off or just taking it consistently at [29:21] the I think five grams per day is kind [29:23] of the typical um dose that people take. [29:27] >> So again, no solutions, only trade-offs. [29:29] You can load it and you will saturate [29:31] your phosphocreatin stores faster, like [29:34] usually within a week. Uh if you just [29:36] take five grams per day, it'll take two, [29:38] three, four weeks. uh but you will get [29:40] to the same place and you're probably [29:44] going to have a much lower risk of GI [29:46] issues. Some people creatin can be a gut [29:49] irritant. If it is for some folks, I [29:51] would recommend splitting it into [29:52] multiple doses. So maybe like multiple [29:54] two one or two gram doses per day and [29:57] definitely don't load it if you're [29:58] somebody who has GI issues from it. The [30:00] more into the weeds people tend to get, [30:02] and again this is just my own anecdote [30:04] and observation, the more into the weeds [30:05] they tend to get, the less hard I see [30:08] them train. And so one of the things I [30:11] really like that Mike Israel said who's [30:13] got a PhD and is a bodybuilder himself, [30:17] he said, "You can't outscience [30:20] hard training." If you're looking to [30:21] build muscle and you're looking to [30:22] improve your body composition, that the [30:24] main thing is just doing the work over [30:26] time. And I think a lot of that is [30:28] getting the confidence of doing [30:31] something hard that there's a payoff at [30:32] the end. I get asked a lot in my Q&A, [30:34] how do I get more confident? How do I [30:36] become more confident? I'll tell people [30:38] you have to do you have there there's no [30:40] hack you can't read about you got to get [30:42] in the arena and I don't mean like [30:43] compete in sports necessarily but like [30:46] doing a PhD or doing something just [30:49] something hard where you're putting [30:50] yourself out there and you're saying [30:52] this is my goal and I'm going to go for [30:53] it you just learn so much by doing that [30:57] about yourself [30:58] >> I must say this conversation for me has [31:00] been tremendously rewarding the amount [31:01] of knowledge that you contain inside you [31:04] is is astonishing and [31:06] >> there's a lot of stuff rattle around up [31:07] there. [31:07] >> Well, and and we all benefit because [31:09] your ability to pull from the [31:11] mechanistic side, again, I think in not [31:14] limited to but related to your [31:15] background in biochemistry all the way [31:17] through to the um the impact in humans, [31:20] animal studies, being able to understand [31:22] where those sit relative to one another. [31:23] And then you're obviously a practitioner [31:25] of you practice what you preach and what [31:28] you talk about pertains to men, to [31:31] women, younger people, older people, [31:34] people who are vegan, keto, carnivore, [31:37] you really are able to net a tremendous [31:39] number of ideas while staying really [31:40] nuanced and data driven. And so just [31:44] want to say for myself and on behalf of [31:46] the listeners, really appreciate you [31:48] coming in here today and sharing with us [31:50] your knowledge. So thank you so much for [31:52] your time. Oh, thank you. I appreciate [31:54] the opportunity. I I really enjoyed it.