Ask Steve Today
Ask Steve a Question
Listen to Steve's Free Weight Loss Seminar
A Community of Support
Join Now

The Truth About Fat

Everything you need to know about fat, including an explanation of which is worse -- belly fat or thigh fat.

By Kathleen Doheny WebMD Feature  Reviewed by Louise Chang, MD

 

For most of us, body fat has a bad reputation. From the dimply stuff that plagues women's thighs to the beer bellies that can pop out in middle-aged men, fat is typically something we agonize over, scorn, and try to exercise away. But for scientists, fat is intriguing -- and becoming more so every day. "Fat is one of the most fascinating organs out there," says Aaron Cypess, MD, PhD, an instructor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and a research associate at the Joslin Diabetes Center in Boston. "We are only now beginning to understand fat."

"Fat has more functions in the body than we thought," agrees Rachel Whitmer, PhD, research scientist at the Kaiser Permanente Division of Research in Oakland, Calif., who has studied the links between fat and brain health. To get the skinny on fat, WebMD asked four experts on fat -- who, not surprisingly, prefer not to be called fat experts -- to fill us in.

Fat is known to have two main purposes, says Susan Fried, PhD, director of the Boston Obesity and Nutrition Research Center at Boston University and a long-time researcher in the field.

  • Fat stores excess calories in a safe way so you can mobilize the fat stores when you're hungry.
  • Fat releases hormones that control metabolism.

But that's the broad brushstroke picture. Read on for details about various types of fat -- brown, white, subcutaneous, visceral, and belly fat.

Brown Fat

Brown fat has gotten a lot of buzz recently, with the discovery that it's not the mostly worthless fat scientists had thought. In recent studies, scientists have found that lean people tend to have more brown fat than overweight or obese people -- and that when stimulated it can burn calories. Scientists are eyeing it as a potential obesity treatment if they can figure out a way to increase a person's brown fat or stimulate existing brown fat.

It's known that children have more brown fat than adults, and it's what helps them keep warm. Brown fat stores decline in adults but still help with warmth. "We've shown brown fat is more active in people in Boston in colder months," Cypess says, leading to the idea of sleeping in chillier rooms to burn a few more calories. Brown fat is now thought to be more like muscle than like white fat. When activated, brown fat burns white fat. Although leaner adults have more brown fat than heavier people, even their brown fat cells are greatly outnumbered by white fat cells. "A 150-pound person might have 20 or 30 pounds of fat," Cypess says. "They are only going to have 2 or 3 ounces of brown fat." But that 2 ounces, he says, if maximally stimulated, could burn off 300 to 500 calories a day -- enough to lose up to a pound in a week.  "You might give people a drug that increases brown fat," he says. "We're working on one."

But even if the drug to stimulate brown fat pans out, Cypess warns, it won't be a cure-all for weight issues. It may, however, help a person achieve more weight loss combined with a sound diet and exercise regimen.

White Fat

White fat is much more plentiful than brown, experts agree. The job of white fat is to store energy and produce hormones that are then secreted into the bloodstream. Small fat cells produce a "good guy" hormone called adiponectin, which makes the liver and muscles sensitive to the hormone insulin, in the process making us less susceptible to diabetes and heart disease. When people become fat, the production of adiponectin slows down or shuts down, setting them up for disease, according to Fried and others.

Subcutaneous Fat

Subcutaneous fat is found directly under the skin. It's the fat that's measured using skin-fold calipers to estimate your total body fat. In terms of overall health, subcutaneous fat in the thighs and buttocks, for instance, may not be as bad and may have some potential benefits, says Cypess. "It may not cause as many problems" as other types of fat, specifically the deeper, visceral fat, he says. But subcutaneous fat cells on the belly may be another story, says Fried. There's emerging evidence that the danger of big bellies lies not only in the deep visceral fat but also the subcutaneous fat.

Visceral Fat

Visceral or "deep" fat wraps around the inner organs and spells trouble for your health. How do you know if you have it? "If you have a large waist or belly, of course you have visceral fat," Whitmer says. Visceral fat drives up your risk for diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and even dementia.  Visceral fat is thought to play a larger role in insulin resistance -- which boosts risk of diabetes -- than other fat, Whitmer tells WebMD. It's not clear why, but it could explain or partially explain why visceral fat is a health risk. Whitmer investigated the link between visceral fat and dementia. In a study, she evaluated the records of more than 6,500 members of Kaiser Permanente of Northern California, a large health maintenance organization, for an average of 36 years, from the time they were in their 40s until they were in their 70s.

The records included details on height, weight, and belly diameter -- a reflection of the amount of visceral fat. Those with the biggest bellies had a higher risk of dementia than those with smaller bellies. The link was true even for people with excess belly fat but overall of normal weight. She doesn't know why belly fat and dementia are linked, but speculates that substances such as leptin, a hormone released by the belly fat, may have some adverse effect on the brain. Leptin plays a role in appetite regulation but also in learning and memory.

Belly Fat

Belly fat has gotten a mostly deserved reputation as an unhealthy fat. "Understand that belly fat is both visceral and subcutaneous," says Kristen Gill Hairston, MD, MPH, an assistant professor of medicine at Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, N.C. "We don't have a perfect way yet to determine which [of belly fat] is subcutaneous or visceral, except by CT scan, but that's not cost-effective."

But if you've got an oversize belly, figuring out how much is visceral and how much is subcutaneous isn't as important as recognizing a big belly is unhealthy, she says. How big is too big? Women with a waist circumference more than 35 inches and men with a waist circumference more than 40 inches are at increased disease risk. Abdominal fat is viewed as a bigger health risk than hip or thigh fat, Whitmer and other experts say.  And that could mean having a worse effect on insulin resistance, boosting the risk of diabetes, and a worse effect on blood lipids, boosting heart and stroke risks.

Thigh Fat, Buttocks Fat

While men tend to accumulate fat in the belly, it's no secret women, especially if "pear-shaped," accumulate it in their thighs and buttocks. Unsightliness aside, emerging evidence suggests that pear-shaped women are protected from metabolic disease compared to big-bellied people, says Fried. "Thigh fat and butt fat might be good," she says, referring to that area's stores of subcutaneous fat. But the benefit of women being pear shaped may stop at menopause, when women tend to deposit more fat in the abdomen.

Weight Loss and Fat Loss

So when you lose weight, what kind or kinds of fat do you shed? "You're losing white fat," Fried tells WebMD. "People tend to lose evenly all over." The results change a bit, however, if you add workouts to your calorie reduction, she says. "If you exercise plus diet you will tend to lose slightly more visceral fat from your belly." "We're at an exciting point in science," says Whitmer, echoing the input from other scientists in the field. Whitmer and others expect more discoveries about fat of all types to be made in the near future.

 

 

'The Biggest Loser' Has Big Problems, Health Experts Say

Stephanie Pappas
LiveScience Contributor
LiveScience.com 

NBC's "The Biggest Loser" is all about records. In the past seasons, the weight-loss reality show has repeatedly set new benchmarks for heaviest contestant (454, 476 and 526 pounds), fastest 100-pound weight loss (seven weeks), and most weight lost in one week (34 pounds).

The show, which takes obese Americans and pits them against each other in a battle to lose the most weight and win $250,000, thrives on extreme numbers. But physicians and nutritionists worry the show's focus on competitive weight loss is, at best, counterproductive and, at worst, dangerous.

"They're taking people who have been inactive and are not in good shape and boom, automatically subjecting them to this stress," Carol Wolin-Riklin, the bariatric nutrition coordinator for the University of Texas Medical School at Houston, told LiveScience. "Things are going to happen."

And indeed, things have. Two patients were hospitalized after collapsing during a one-mile (1.6 km) foot race for the season 8 premiere. This year's season 9 opened with another strenuous challenge in which contestants raced 26.2 miles (42 km) on stationary bikes. Show medical consultant and UCLA professor Rob Huizenga had to drag one protesting contestant off her bike when she was stricken with severe cramps. A second contestant, 526-pound Michael Ventrella, was treated for exhaustion.

The show's producers point out that contestants are under medical supervision and say the extreme nature of the competition is inspirational for viewers.

And of course, there are serious health risks to being as obese as the Biggest Loser contestants. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), obesity can increase the risk of heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure and certain types of cancer. The risks become more pronounced as the obesity becomes more severe, and losing weight is a very good idea, said Wolin-Riklin ¬- if done right.

"The way I go about encouraging healthful weight loss is by working on changes one at a time," she said. "By making these changes bit-by-bit I think you have a better shot at having long-lasting lifestyle changes."

But weight loss on "The Biggest Loser" is far removed from weight loss in the real world.

For one thing, contestants start out in worse shape than most. Seventeen of the 22 contestants have a body mass index (BMI) over 40, meaning they are severely obese. In the "real world," more than one-third of U.S. adults, or 72 million people, are considered obese with a BMI of 30 or higher, according to the CDC. But research published last month in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that the number of Americans with a BMI over 40 is just under 6 percent. In other words, the show's claim that the contestants are the "epitome" of American obesity is a bit like saying that VH1's "Rock of Love with Bret Michaels" epitomizes the American dating scene.

And then there's the exercise program. Contestants work out five to six hours a day, eating strictly supervised diets. They routinely drop double-digit pounds each week. The contestant who loses the smallest percentage of body weight can be sent home.

In reality, said physician Robert Kushner, the clinical director of the Northwestern University Comprehensive Center on Obesity, a safe rate of weight loss is about one to two pounds per week.

"I think a lot of people can feel quite defeated that they're losing weight in what we would call a recommended amount, but they would have been voted off the show immediately," Kushner told LiveScience. "So the message, to me, is just all wrong."

So is the science. Losing weight rapidly can be risky, according to Virginia Tech professor of human nutrition, foods and exercise Janet Walberg Rankin. Patients who lose weight quickly run the risk of gallstones, mineral deficiencies, loss of muscle tissue and reduced bone density.

Beginning strenuous exercise suddenly can cause problems with hydration, electrolyte balance and cardiac function. High impact workouts can put an extra load on already-stressed bones. At least two contestants in Biggest Loser history have struggled with stress fractures.

Risks aside, weight-loss experts say that the biggest problem with the Biggest Loser is that extreme methods of dropping pounds are less likely to work in the long run. Several former Biggest Loser contestants have regained some or all of the weight, which doesn't surprise Kushner.

"They're not working with a trainer every day, they're not on national TV every day, they're back to life," he said. "It's very difficult to sustain."

While researchers aren't sure if repeated cycles of weight lost and weight gained are more dangerous than staying overweight or obese, the psychological toll of failing to keep weight off can be grim, said Kushner. People often feel like failures and become hopeless about their health.

Those looking for a safe way to lose weight or get healthier permanently should make small changes, Kushner said, like gradually increasing exercise or substituting healthy foods for unhealthy ones. In the real world, slow, steady and committed wins the race.

"We're not looking for extreme makeovers in someone's lifestyle," Kushner said. "We're looking for changes that they can sustain long-term."

Protein – Here’s what you need to know!

Casein and Whey Protein – Both are the primary proteins found in milk. About 20% of the protein in milk is whey and the other 80% is casein.  Both are high quality proteins but whey is known as a fast protein.  That’s because it’s quickly broken down into amino acids and absorbed into your bloodstream.   This makes it a good protein to drink after your workouts.  Casein, on the other hand, is digested more slowly, so it’s ideal for providing your body with a steady supply of small amounts of protein for longer periods of time.   

 

Which is best?  Either will provide your body (and muscles) with the raw materials for growth.

 

Protein Concentrate – The cheapest form of most proteins. It contains slightly higher amounts of fats and carbohydrates than more pure versions and can become clumpy and hard to mix by hand.   However, it provides the same muscle-building benefits. In the case of casein it’s referred to as “caseinate.”

 

Protein Isolate – A protein that’s more pure than concentrate. Meaning it contains less fat and carbohydrates, and is also easier to mix.

 

Hydrolyzed or Hydrosylate Protein – A protein that’s been broken down into smaller fractions than are in a concentrate or isolate, allowing it to be absorbed into your bloodstream more quickly.  However, when it comes to casein hydrosylate this defeats the purpose since the benefit of consuming casein is that it’s absorbed slowly.

 

Micellar Casein or Isolated Casein Peptide – An expensive protein composed almost entirely of pure casein ensuring slow and steady absorption.

 

~But if you're not geting as big or as strong as you'd like, it's probably not your protein intake. It's mostly your workout or possibly your carbohydrate intake!

Last Updated on Tuesday, 15 December 2009 14:37

Label Jargon: Low-fat Vs. Nonfat

Term

Requirement

Reduced fat or Less fat

25% less fat than food it is being compared to

Light (in fat)

50% less fat than food it is being compared to

Low

One serving has 3 or fewer grams of fat

Fat-free

One serving has less than 1/2 gram of fat

Lean

Less than 10 grams of fat, 4.5 grams of saturated fat and 95 mg of cholesterol per serving and per 100 grams of meat, poultry and seafood

Extra lean

Less than 5 grams of fat, 2 grams of saturated fat and 95 mg cholesterol per serving and 100 g of meat, poultry and seafood

Cholesterol-free

Less than 2 mg cholesterol per serving and 2 g or less saturated fat per serving

Low cholesterol

20 mg or less cholesterol per serving and 2 g or less saturated fat per serving

Less cholesterol

25% or less cholesterol than the food it is being compared to and 2 g or less saturated fat per serving

Percent fat-free

Term only allowed when the product meets definition of low fat or fat-free and must reflect the amount of fat in 100 g

High fiber

5 g or more fiber per serving

Sugar-free

Less than 0.5 g of sugar per serving

Sodium-free

Less than 5 mg sodium per serving

Low sodium

140 mg or less per serving

Light (in sodium)

A low calorie or low-fat food with a 50% reduction in sodium

Statistics on Body Fat Percentages!

·    Kids start at 15%
·    At puberty    Boys -10%    Girls - 20%
 
·    Average Man in US             22%
·    Average Woman in US        32%
 
·    Healthy Man                 15% or less
·    Healthy Woman            22% or less
 
·    Male Olympic Athletes           5-12 %
·    Female Olympic Athletes      12-20%
 
·    Female Olympic Swimmers       18%
·    Female Olympic Skaters           16%
·    Female Olympic Gymnasts       14%
Last Updated on Monday, 29 June 2009 11:33

FTC Recovers $25 Million to Settle Allegations of Deceptive Marketing

The FTC has filed complaints in four separate cases alleging that weight-loss and weight-control claims were not supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. Marketers of the four products –Xenadrine EFX, CortiSlim, TrimSpa, and One-A-Day WeightSmart – have settled with the FTC, surrendered cash and other assets worth at least $25 million, and agreed to limit their future advertising claims.

“You won’t find weight loss in a bottle of pills that claims it has the latest scientific breakthrough or miracle ingredient,” said FTC Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras. “Paying for fad science is a good way to lose cash, not pounds.”

Xenadrine EFX

Two marketers of Xenadrine EFX will pay at least $8 million and as much as $12.8 million to settle FTC allegations that Xenadrine EFX’s weight-loss claims were false and unsubstantiated. The funds will be used for consumer redress. In a bankruptcy case not involving the Commission, the defendants have also agreed to pay at least an additional $22.75 million to settle claims brought by creditors and consumers, including personal injury claims for an earlier ephedra-based product.

Xenadrine EFX, which contains, among other ingredients, green tea extract (EGCG), caffeine, and bitter orange (Citrus aurantium), was advertised heavily in print and on television, including in such publications as People, TV Guide, Cosmopolitan, and Men’s Fitness. Xenadrine EFX advertising also appeared in Spanish-language publications.

The FTC’s complaint alleged that the defendants made false or unsubstantiated claims for Xenadrine EFX, including that it was clinically proven to cause rapid and substantial weight loss and clinically proven to be more effective than leading ephedrine-based diet products. According to the complaint, Robert Chinery commissioned several studies of Xenadrine EFX, none of which showed substantial weight loss. The complaint alleged that in one of these studies, subjects taking Xenadrine EFX lost an average of only 1.5 pounds over the 10-week study, while a control group taking a placebo lost an average of 2.5 pounds over the same period.

The complaint also alleged that Xenadrine EFX advertisements falsely represented that persons appearing in the ads achieved the reported weight loss solely by using Xenadrine EFX. According to the FTC complaint, consumer endorsers lost weight by engaging in rigorous diet and/or exercise programs. In addition, the endorsers were paid from $1,000 to $20,000 in connection with their testimonials; according to the complaint, Xenadrine EFX advertisements failed to disclose those payments.

The stipulated federal court order with Robert Chinery, Jr. and RTC Research & Development, LLC (“RTC”) prohibits certain claims regarding Xenadrine EFX and prohibits all claims regarding the health benefits, performance, efficacy, safety, or side effects of any weight-loss product, dietary supplement, food, drug, or device, unless the representation is true, not misleading, and substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence. The settlement also prohibits misrepresentations about any test or study. In addition, the order prohibits misrepresentations of the actual experience of any user or endorser and requires clear and prominent disclosure of any relationship that would materially affect the weight or credibility given to a user testimonial or endorsement. Finally, Robert Chinery and RTC cannot use their settlement with the Commission as a basis for seeking a cash refund of Xenadrine EFX-related income taxes that they previously reported as paid.

CortiSlim and CortiStress

The seven marketers of CortiSlim and CortiStress will surrender, in total, assets worth at least $12 million to settle FTC charges that they made false and unsubstantiated claims that their products can cause weight loss and reduce the risk of, or prevent, serious health conditions. In the final three settlement agreements announced today, the FTC will recover $8.4 million in cash, along with proceeds from the sale of a residence acquired with CortiSlim profits. The settlements also require the two individual defendants to liquidate tax shelters and transfer to the Commission any funds that remain after paying taxes and penalties. In two earlier settlement agreements, the defendants turned over $1.5 million in cash, a boat, a truck, a real estate interest, and proceeds from a tax shelter. The funds recovered from the seven defendants will be used for consumer redress.

The advertising campaign for CortiSlim ran nationwide, including ads on broadcast and cable television, radio, print media, and the Internet. The FTC’s complaint alleged that advertising claims about CortiSlim’s ability to cause rapid, substantial, and permanent weight loss in all users were false or unsubstantiated, as were claims about CortiStress’s ability to reduce the risk of osteoporosis, obesity, diabetes, Alzheimer’s disease, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. The FTC also alleged that CortiSlim and CortiStress infomercials were deceptively formatted to appear as talk shows rather than advertisements.

The final settlements announced today are with Stephen F. Cheng and his company, Window Rock Enterprises, Inc., and with Gregory S. Cynaumon and his company, Infinity Advertising, Inc. All of the settlements bar misrepresentations of any tests or studies and prohibit claims about the performance, effects on weight, or other health benefits of any dietary supplement, food, drug, cosmetic, or device unless the claims are true, not misleading, and substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence. The stipulated orders prohibit the use of deceptively formatted television and radio advertisements. In addition, the defendants cannot use their settlement with the Commission as a basis for seeking a cash refund of income taxes that they reported as paid.

TrimSpa

The marketers of TrimSpa will pay $1.5 million to settle FTC allegations that their weight-loss claims were unsubstantiated. According to the FTC’s complaint, the marketers had inadequate scientific evidence to support their advertising claims that TrimSpa causes rapid and substantial weight loss and that one of its ingredients, Hoodia gordonii, enables users to lose substantial amounts of weight by suppressing appetite.

Many ads for “TrimSpa Completely Ephedra Free Formula X32” featured testimonials. Celebrity Anna Nicole Smith claimed to have lost 69 pounds in eight months by using TrimSpa. Other advertising claims included “Your high speed dream body diet pill” and “It makes losing 30, 50, even 70 pounds (or however many pounds you need to lose) painless.”

TrimSpa ads appeared on television, in magazines, on radio, and in local newspapers. TrimSpa was also promoted on a Web site, at some NASCAR events, and other live events.

The FTC consent agreement requires TrimSpa’s marketers – Goen Technologies Corp., Nutramerica Corp., TrimSpa, Inc., and Alexander Szynalski, also known as Alexander Goen – to pay $1.5 million. The agreement also prohibits the marketers from making any claims about the health benefits, performance, efficacy, safety, or side effects of TrimSpa, Hoodia gordonii, or any dietary supplement, food, drug, or health-related service or program, unless the claims are true, not misleading, and substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence.

One-A-Day WeightSmart

The Bayer Corporation will pay a $3.2 million civil penalty to settle FTC allegations that advertisements for One-A-Day WeightSmart multivitamins violated an earlier Commission order requiring all health claims for One-A-Day brand vitamins to be supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence.

Bayer ran a national advertising campaign for One-A-Day WeightSmart, which contains EGCG (epigallocatechin gallate), a green tea extract. Bayer also advertised on television, radio, and the Internet, and in newspapers and magazines, such as RedBook, Family Circle, and TV Guide.

Advertising claims included statements such as:

  • “Just in! Most women over 30 can gain 10 pounds a decade, due in part to slowing metabolism.… So eat right, exercise, and take One-A-Day WeightSmart. The complete multi-vitamin with EGCG to enhance metabolism.”
  • “One-A-Day WeightSmart. The first and only complete multivitamin with an ingredient to enhance your metabolism. EGCG, a natural green tea extract, to help you while you manage your weight.”

The complaint alleges that Bayer Corporation marketed One-A-Day WeightSmart with unsubstantiated claims that it

  • increases metabolism;
  • enhances metabolism through its EGCG content;
  • helps prevent some of the weight gain associated with a decline in metabolism in users over age 30; and
  • helps users control their weight by enhancing their metabolism.

The FTC alleges that these unsubstantiated claims violate a 1991 Commission order against Bayer’s predecessor, Miles Inc., that require all claims about the benefits of One-A-Day brand products to be substantiated by competent and reliable scientific evidence.

In addition to the $3.2 million civil penalty, Bayer is prohibited from violating the FTC order and from making unsubstantiated representations regarding the benefits, performance, efficacy, safety, or side effects of any dietary supplement, multivitamin, or weight-control product.

The FTC acknowledges the National Advertising Division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus for its referrals of some of these cases.

The Commission vote to accept the Bayer settlement was 5-0. At the Commission’s request, the Department of Justice filed the complaint and proposed consent decree on January 3, 2007, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

The Commission vote to accept the TrimSpa consent agreement, subject to public comment, was 4-0, with Commissioner Rosch recused. The FTC will publish an announcement regarding the agreement in the Federal Register. The agreement will be subject to public comment for 30 days, beginning today and ending February 5, 2007. Comments should be addressed to the FTC, Office of the Secretary, Room H-135, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20580. The FTC requests that any comment filed in paper form be sent by courier or overnight service, if possible, because U.S. postal mail in the Washington area and at the Commission is subject to delay due to heightened security precautions.

The Commission votes to authorize staff to file the CortiSlim stipulated final orders were both 5-0. The stipulated final orders for permanent injunction were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on October 3, 2006 for Stephen Cheng and Window Rock Enterprises, Inc. and on January 3, 2007 for Gregory Cynaumon and Infinity Advertising, Inc.

The Commission vote to authorize staff to file the Xenadrine EFX stipulated final order was 5-0. The stipulated final order for permanent injunction was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on December 26, 2006.

NOTE: The proposed consent decree and the stipulated final orders are for settlement purposes only and do not constitute admissions by the settling defendants of law violations. They are subject to court approval and have the force of law when signed by the judge. Likewise, the administrative consent agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission of a law violation. When the Commission issues a consent agreement on a final basis, it carries the force of law with respect to future actions. Each violation of such an order may result in a civil penalty of $11,000.        More info     http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16467558/ 

Last Updated on Monday, 29 June 2009 11:24

Page 1 of 2

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »

Shout Box

Latest Message: 3 months, 3 weeks ago
  • ForestGym17 : Hey guys. I asked a questions and got an audio responce in a matter of hours. If anybody is looking at this site, wondering if they should sign up on or not - it would seem Steve is giving value for money!!! So climb aboard!!!
  • AtomicDon : With your help, I understand what it takes to be in shape, to maintain weight and to eat right.
  • hebditch : hey steve , love the vids , hopefully together we can take my nutrition and body shape to the next level .
  • bahman : Lost 21 lb since feb 2nd thanks to your valuable insights.thank you Steve.
  • auron130 : Hi everyone. I'm new to this so I'm completely green! This site is great! I hope everyone's workouts are getting better
  • djvision : You're website looks great! Wishing you much success! Thank you for what you do!!
  • Jase : Hey everyone :)
  • kingfatty : hello all
  • LeaTurano : Hi from your little sister :) I'll always be your biggest fan!
  • Jason-TgWeb : Hello!

Only registered users are allowed to post

You can find me here!

Facebook Flickr FriendFeed Jaiku LinkedIn MySpace Plurk Tumblr Twitter YouTube

Spread the Word!

Blog Talk Radio