CrossFit Ramstein

What is a healthy diet? What is a high performance diet? Good questions. Depending on who you ask, what you read, and perhaps what your mother fed you … you will undoubtedly get limitless interpretations. Now, ivory tower recommendations and word of mouth advice may work. However, in order to get the best idea of what diet/conditions will work best for you, getting dirty and doing a little “lab” work is in order. The content below will describe my (an Air Force Registered Dietitian and Licensed Healthcare Provider) three month journey in to “The Zone”. [Feel free to skip my attempts at journalism and skip down to the results at the bottom]

Anyone who’s been around the CrossFit community recognizes that HQ has recommended following a combination of The Zone diet with high quality foods for improved performance and health. The anecdotal stories sound something like “when an individual from a group of athletes who have been competing fairly steadily begins weighing and measuring in The Zone, that athlete breaks away from the pack. Leaning out occurs rapidly with concurrent increases in performance. Athlete ‘Joe’ cuts 2 minutes off his Fran time in a week! ”.

Now that sounds almost too good to be true—and as with most things that sound too good to be true, I am always a little apprehensive. Also, coming from an exercise and sports science background and being a Registered Dietitian, there are certain beliefs that I’d hold. Most of the current sports nutrition guidance these days recommends a far greater level and proportion of carbohydrate intake (generally 50-75% energy from carbohydrate, with liberal amounts of grains and dairy) than The Zone’s 40% of total calories.

I looked at things objectively though. The Zone recommends you choose “favorable” carbohydrates (generally non-starchy vegetables, fruit, and a little oatmeal) rather than “unfavorable”, simple carbohydrates such as rice or pasta. I reasoned that “if most of your carbohydrates came from vegetables and fruits, you probably won’t have too much trouble meeting your needs for vitamins and minerals”. And as for energy, the body prefers to burn fat for fuel when it is at rest. The only time that carbohydrate is needed in significant quantities is when we are exercising at moderate intensity or higher. What’s that, maybe one, two hours per day? Theoretically, The Zone should supply sufficient carbohydrates to fuel a 30-90 minute workout; and the rest of the day, we could probably use fats without much of a problem. Furthermore, the protein recommendations that a well educated sports nutrition specialist would give, and those of The Zone are pretty similar at least in terms of absolute quantity (0.7-1.0 g protein per pound bodyweight) if not proportion (30% of calories coming from protein in the zone vs. ~15-20% commonly recommended to athletes by Dietitians). In regards to the fat intake: the American Heart Association recommends 25-35% of total calories come from fat. The Zone’s 30% recommendation sandwiched into this guideline quite neatly. Conversely, when “The Athletes Zone” is applied, and individuals keep their protein and carbohydrate levels the same while increasing their fat blocks by a multiple of 2, 3, 4, or even 5, the total fat increases significantly and the % of total daily calories coming from fat increase from the recommended 30% to as high as 50% or more. Which is well outside of the “healthy” recommendations of the American Heart Association, Dietetic Association, Medical Association and many other health-governing bodies ending in “association”.

Seeing the potential for fat intake to get out of hand, and believing that the block recommendations for carbohydrates would not be sufficient to fuel my “intense” training (at the time doing two-a-day workouts pretty regularly training for CrossFit, Boxing, and considering cross training to Spec Ops) or recovery between bouts. So I held off on any fair trial of The Zone during my first 6 months of CrossFit training. I was making pretty good gains on my traditional diet and wasn’t interested in messing with anything until after the European Regional Qualifiers. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, right?

Then a few things happened. The regional qualifiers came, I competed, and got dominated (by Mikko Salo and Brian Bowen among others). I had a year to mess around before any serious evaluations came up. I had no excuse. Additionally, I was getting more and more questions about The Zone from the athletes at CrossFit Ramstein. I read more articles on the CrossFit Journal noticing that many of the top athletes seemed to be using some form of The Zone; and our best athlete (Brian) was having success with The Zone. I didn’t want to make any recommendations or give an opinion on something that I hadn’t myself tried, so I re-read CrossFit Journal 21 bought myself a copy of Barry Sears Enter the Zone and Mastering the Zone and I planned out a trial of the zone—as scientific as reasonably possible using one busy subject— myself!— as the guinea pig. I began 8 April 2009. You can view my food logs and my progression [starting with 16 blocks at 1x fat, increasing to 18 blocks, then 20 blocks (each at 1x fat), then increasing fat at 20 blocks to 2x fat, playing around a little bit with subbing in extra fat blocks for a few of the carbohydrate blocks, and then finally dropping blocks back down to 16 blocks each of protein and carbohydrate and increasing added fat to 48-64 blocks (3-4x)] here.  Please notice the 23 July post which evaluated the macro and micronutrient content of a typical day.

Here is the data that I have for before (within 3-4 months before beginning “Zoning” in April) and after (Late July) completing 3 solid months of Zone favorable dietary trials combined with CrossFit training.

Anthropometry:

20 Feb 2009 (before):        24 Jul 2009 (after)                 Change/Result
Weight: 162 lb                          151.5 lb                               -10.5 lb bodyweight (impartial)
Body Fat%: 13.52%                     9.18%                                   -4.34 % bodyfat (good)
Lean Mass: 140.1 lb                   137.6 lb                               -2.5 lb lean mass (bad)
Fat Mass: 21.9 lb                       13.9 lb                                 -10.5 lb fat mass (good)
AC: 32 inches                            30 inches                              -2 inches abdominal circ. (good)

Other comments: I am visibly leaner in the face and mid section—and get a lot of “skinny guy” comments lately (which admittedly bugs me a little). Also, the majority of the weight that was lost was lost during the first month to six weeks when I was on 16-18 blocks at 1x fat. Once increasing blocks to 20 or experimenting with increasing fat intake at 16 blocks, weight transitioned in to maintenance.

Vitals/Blood Pressure (BP):

21 Jan 2009 (before)           23 Jul 2009 (after)                Change/Result
Systolic BP: 127                      114                                          -13 mgHg Systolic BP (good)
Diastolic BP: 76                       58                                           -18 mgHg Diastolic BP (good)
Pulse: 67                                 50                                           -17 beats per minute (good)

Labs: Lipoprotein Screening Panel

24 Nov 2008 (before)             23 Jul 2009 (after)                     Change/Result
Total Cholesterol: 134               132                                            -2 mg/dL total chol (good)
Triglyceride: 48                         33                                             -15 mg/dL TG (good)
HDL (“good”) Chol: 42               51                                              +9 mg/dL HDL chol (good)
LDL (“bad”) Chol: 82.4              74.4                                            -8 mg/dL LDL chol (good)
Chol/HDL ratio 3.2                     2.6                                             -0.6 chol/HDL (good)

Performance: View my training log here.
“DT” PR’d 24July at 11:18 vs. 13:18 on 15April, both scaled to 115# (progress)
Deadlift 1-1-1-1-1-1-1: 325# Max on 21July vs. 375# max on 3March … however, 21 July was with very strict form and heavier weights were not attempted, 3 March was with a rubber back. (Debatable … would be interested to see what my current 1RM would be if I used sloppy form again)
Front Squat 1RM: 205# 21July vs. 195 24Feb (progress)
Filthy Fifty: 22:18 on 20Jul (RX’d) vs. 27:25 (w/ one substition) on 25Apr and 26:20 on 20Dec(RX’d) (progress)
Max Effort 400m run: 1:11 on 13Jul vs 1:09 26Jan (Negligible Setback)
Squat clean 1RM: 175# 2July vs. 185# 19Feb (Setback)
Max effort 1.5 mile run: 9:08 on 15Jun vs. 9:03 in Jan (Negligible Setback)
Cindy: 22.9 Rounds 10June vs. 25.3 rounds 9Feb (Setback)
Overhead Squat: 135#x5 reps on 10June vs. 130#x3 reps on 14Jan (progress)
Split Jerk 1RM: 201# 29May vs. 175# 17Dec (progress)
Annie: 4:56 on 11May vs. 9:21 on 10Feb (progress)
Grace: 7:54 on 9May vs. 9:23 on 5Mar (progress)
Angie: 14:21 on 19Apr vs. 16:27 on 26Dec (progress)

Comments:

Dietary comparison: Before starting the zone, my macronutrient breakdown on average was ~3400 calories per day, 50% Carbohydrate, 20% Protein, 30% Fat. I was already consuming a comparable (if not slightly higher) amount of proteins each day, and respectable levels of vegetables and fruits (5-7 total servings each day). The majority of my daily carbohydrates came from brown rice, oatmeal, Kix or Cheerios cereal, bananas, or dried apricots and plums—with an occasional bowl of frosted flakes or white rice post workout (when sweeter foods are generally acceptable). Leaner meats were chosen as well as whole eggs (occasionally mixed with egg whites) and additional dietary fat generally came from olive oil, peanut butter (several servings per day), coconut oil, mixed nuts, or smart balance. Additionally, I was generally avoiding cow’s milk and instead drank unsweetened soy milk (between 2 and 6 cups daily). Alcohol generally limited to 1-2 glasses of red wine 3-4 nights per week. Coffee/energy drinks generally not consumed. Green, black, or herbal tea prepared 3 to 4 times per day. Sweets limited to dark chocolate on occasion. Fish oil pills were consumed at an average rate of 6-9g per day. The result was that I maintained a bodyweight at a fairly lean ~165# without losing or gaining weight. I had been CrossFitting for about 6-8 months, was performing above average, and was still making progress. In short, I would already have been considered healthier than most before the start of the dietary trial.

When The Zone was started, noticeable dietary changes were: significant decreases in daily caloric intake (~1600 calories in the beginning, 2400 calories near the end), decrease in total carbohydrate as well as the proportion of calories coming from carbohydrate. Significant decrease in starch/grain intake (ranging between 0 and 3 servings daily). Significant increase in vegetable and fruit intake (generally 15-20+ total servings per day). Increase in total fat intake (once fat blocks were increased to the levels of the athlete’s zone). Increase in consumption of olives, avocados, and nuts—with a decrease in peanut and peanut butter consumption in favor of more almonds and cashew. Soy consumption reduced to almost none, while milk was added back in to the diet in small amounts (~1 glass per day). And finally, an increase in saturated fat intake (primarily coming from dark chocolate, coconut and coconut oil, meats and eggs, and during the later months of the trial: cream or half and half). Wine/alcohol, tea, and fish oil intake remained roughly constant. Coffee/espresso intake increased from none before, to 1 to 3 glasses per week in the final 6 weeks of the trial (enjoyed with whole milk, half and half, or heavy cream)

The 23 July nutrition analysis of a sample day of my current 16 block at 3-4x fat goal revealed the following values: 2367 total calories, 200g carbohydrate (less 65g fiber, yields 135g effective/net carbs), 174g protein (including those from nuts, seeds, and plants), 102 g fat (34g saturated, 38g monounsaturated, 20g polyunsaturated), and 11g alcohol. %composition of intake was broken down as 29% calories from carbohydrate, 29% calories from protein, 39% calories from fat, and 3% calories from alcohol. Every single vitamin and mineral RDA was met or exceeded.

Anthropometry: A calibrated scale, tape measure, and neck-to-waist ratio calculations were used to derive anthropometric data. Granted, neck-to-waist ratios are not the cutting edge when it comes to body fat measurement. Furthermore, the first few pounds of weight lost were likely water-weight. However, these data give a reasonable idea of change and for the sake of simplicity, let’s role with it. Despite not having a particular goal to lose weight, this dietary trial resulted in a little over 10 pounds of weight loss. Was it the result of “the zone” or was it simply the effect of caloric restriction? As dietary analysis revealed, my total caloric intake during “the zone” rarely exceeded 2400 calories. In contrast, my caloric intake averaged around 3400 calories before “entering the zone”. It’d be reasonable to assume that the weight was lost due to the difference in total kcal intake. What I would comment on is that the weight was the easiest 10 pounds that I have ever lost. Whether it was the macronutrient composition or whether it was the high volume of veggie intake which kept my belly full, or increased sense of satiety due to increased fat intake … I was rarely hungry. Additionally, while I did lose a few pounds of lean body mass (to my dismay!) as would be typical of nearly any weight loss program … the proportion of fat lost was significantly higher. The resultant decrease in body fat percentage (measured) and shift in body composition suggests that this regimen was effective at decreasing body fat with less than typical decreases in lean mass. Lastly, the weight loss may have been avoided, or more gradual if I had began at a multiplier of 3-4x fat rather than going through the early stages at 16 blocks each protein, carbohydrate, and fat.

Vitals: A decrease in systolic and diastolic blood pressure as well as heart rate. Pretty easy to interpret—my heart is either more efficient or less stressed. This is likely related to a great degree to the weight loss that was seen. Also, decreases in sodium and increases in potassium intake (as seen in my diet due to reduction in processed foods and increases in fruits and vegetables) are correlated with improved blood pressure and decreased cardiovascular risk.

Labs: Very impressed by this. I had a very good blood lipid profile before the start of the trial and didn’t think that I had much room to improve. I had predicted an increase in HDL (which is favorable – desirable reference point is >40 for men) due to the increased intake of healthy fats and moderation of red wine. I also predicted a decrease in triglycerides related to the decrease in carbohydrate intake and sugar. When considering LDL (desirable reference point is <130 for healthy individuals), I wasn’t sure what to think. While my monounsaturated fat intake (generally considered heart healthy: studies show DECREASES in LDL coupled with INCREASES in HDL—both desirable effects) increased, so did my saturated intake (which studies have generally shown INCREASES in HDL (good) as well as INCREASES in LDL (not so good)). I was very pleasantly surprised to see that my LDL dropped by 8 points. Perhaps more important is the ratio of cholesterol to HDL (CHOL/HDL—lower value considered better). This ratio followed suit and also decreased in a favorable manner. So when all was said and done, every single one of my blood cholesterol measures was improved.
Fasting blood glucose would also be a useful lab to measure to evaluate the effectiveness of a diet at preventing chronic diseases. I didn’t bother measuring it in my case because I am certain that it improved in a favorable manner or did not change. I can arrive to this assumption reasonably because my carbohydrate intake decreased, my weight decreased, and my blood triglycerides decreased. All three of these measures would predict that my insulin sensitivity has increased (a good thing)

Performance: I’ll let you look at the numbers and make your own conclusions. I posted results from any workout completed during the trial that had a comparable reference within the few months prior to beginning the trial. What I will say is that it can be tricky to absolutely measure progress in any one workout with CrossFit because your performance may be affected by what you did in the previous 2-3 days, workouts become harder or easier as you increase or decrease your body weight, and we all have good days and bad days. Reviewing my results above, I have both forward progress and setbacks. However, many of the measures in forward progress were to the order of several minutes, reps, or considerable poundage. Looking at the setbacks, several of them were degradation by only a few seconds, or 5 to 10 pounds— the exceptions being my deadlift 1RM and “Cindy” which were my most significant setbacks. Both of which I attribute the decreased “measure” of performance more to an INCREASE in strictness and attention to form (changing to doing pushups chest to ground makes a pretty big difference) than to a decrease in power output.

Other notes: The most appealing result of these dietary trials is that my focus has improved significantly. I am more able to concentrate in the afternoons and no longer doze off in meetings. I feel like my energy levels are more stable. The least appealing aspect of the diet is of course the fact that you have to measure your food and perhaps give up or reduce some of the foods which you are used to (frosted flakes). When travelling it is a bit more difficult. The three weeks during my firth month zoning I was staying in a hotel while on temporary duty in Texas. Additionally, I went on several three-to-ten day trips or duties to Manchester, Newport Beach California, Portland Oregon, and Ireland, as well as several day trips locally in Germany. When travelling and eating out, I simply did my best to eyeball and estimate amounts and keep zone proportions. When in doubt, I asked the waiter for extra vegetables instead of the rice, pasta, or potatoes which inevitably sneak their way on to the plates of 90% of menu choices. I usually kept pouches of tuna or jerky, bags of nuts, and dried fruit with me when travelling in order to supplement my meals and get them to appropriate zone proportions. If I had to reach out of the zone in order to get a meal in a pinch, or to enjoy a special occasion, then no sweat, I just got back in during the next meal or the next day. The occasional cheat meal is entirely acceptable, and often recommended. More to come on dietary strategies on a later post.

Overall Impressions: The results speak pretty well for themselves. My body composition improved my vitals and blood lipids improved, and my fitness measures generally improved greatly, remained constant, or decreased very minimally. In the end I would consider myself an all around healthier person and better overall athlete. It is hard to isolate the effect of the diet from the effect of my training when using only one subject in a real world environment, so this “study” does not necessarily conclude that all positive effects were induced by the zone diet. However, it is an example of how a well-planned and executed zone diet can improve health and fitness when paired with CrossFit programming.

It is also important to distinguish the “Zone Diet” emphasizing paleo-friendly foods (meat and vegetables, nuts and seeds, some fruit, little starch, no sugar) from a “Zone Diet” in which calories are chosen in Zone proportions without regard for quality or source. Anyone looking at my diet logs—loaded with fruits and vegetables—would say, that looks like a pretty healthy diet. It would be a reasonable wager to assume that my results would not have been as favorable had my carbohydrates fit within the zone, but came from pasta or ice cream. I’ll leave that study up to someone else. I’m happy with what I’ve got.

One last consideration before wrapping up is the fact that I was healthy before initiating the study. Generally, many of the nutrition or exercise studies out there evaluating the health benefits of products, diets, or exercise regimens use untrained, sedentary, and often overweight participants. The results are almost always positive because the individual has SO much room for improvement that ANY increase in exercise or improvement in diet will yield significant positive results (it’s common to see someone who has never run before increase their 5K time from 35 minutes to 25 minutes in just a few weeks—you generally won’t see an elite runner shave even 10 seconds off their 16:00 personal record). Much smaller improvements (or no improvements) are generally seen when studies use trained, lean individuals. After all, “the last 10 pounds is the hardest to lose”, right?

In conclusion, changing to a diet consisting of paleo-friendly foods eaten in [athletes] zone proportions resulted in significant improvements in body composition, vital signs, blood values, and performance for a 25 year old, “extra medium”, healthy male, with type A positive blood and Irish genes. You may or may not get comparable results. This does not constitute individual medical advice—you try at your own risk.

After establishing a baseline, future dietary trials will likely include more stringent attention paid to elimination of certain non-paleo foods (e.g. Grains, Dairy, Legumes) and other nutritional strategies such as intermittent fasting, night-shade elimination, rotational regimens, etc. One step at a time though. Start by eating more vegetables.