Google Fit app review: a free and excellent fitness tracker

If there's one piece of technology that has really exploded in popularity in recent years, it has to be fitness trackers. As recent as 3 years ago wearing devices around your wrist, clipped to your clothing was a niche market. At the same time, using phone app to track your runs or rides were common for enthusiasts and competitors, but the average person didn't care all that much. Since then however, it's difficult to be in a public place, a shopping centre, office, or busy pedestrian street without spotting many a lot of these devices on people's wrists.

Activity trackers likes Fitbits were among the most popular holiday gifts for the last couple of years. Whether it's dedicated devices or specific apps, it's become incredibly common, extremely easy and debatably useful for people track their steps, weight, distance travelled, energy burned and overall physical activity in pursuit of better health and well being. There are so many options with a wide range of features, form factors and price points, but if you're just starting out and testing the waters, Google Fit may be what you're looking for.

Google Fit is an activity tracker created and managed by Google, in the same vain as Gmail, Google Photos, and Google Calendar. Like all other Google Apps, Google Fit is at its core, web-based which means all information is stored and sorted on Google’s services and therefore accessible across all internet connected devices. Google Fit’s ability to automatically track steps, distance and all other typical use-case information, requires your phone to run Android 4.0 (Ice Cream Sandwich) if the phone itself is going to be the primary tracker. The Android OS version shouldn’t be a worry as over 90% of all Android devices run at least 4.0 - if you have an Android device younger than 5 years, you should be good.

What Google Fit does

Google Fit is an app which tracks all of the basic markers of physical activity - steps, distance, active time and energy burned. It also allows you enter goals for each on a daily or weekly basis, and enter your weight measurements. The ring is usually the first graphic you see which fills as you build your activity each day with different colours differentiating between different information. The app is able to intelligently distinguish between walking and running, so if you forget to identifying a run, it will still log your steps, energy and the rest as your pace picks up. It's needy, but fun, to go back and find out that it identified those times you quickly scurried across the road or ran around the yard with the dog for a few minutes. Of course, for deliberate workouts, you can select your activity from a massive list (A-Z, Aerobics to Zumba) and the app will smartly configure energy burning, steps and active time for you. You can also enter an activity afterwards - in case you forgot or didn’t have your phone, or any tracking device on you at the time of your workout.

Google Fit then sorts all of this information and presents it to you in real time and with next to no effort. Simple rings and bars show progress, icons are clear and the overall interface make scrolling through past activities, entering new data, changing settings or viewing progress trends easy and fast. The app is designed incredibly cleanly and refrains from bombarding you with menus, options and other elements that could create a cluttered and distracting user experience. Everything you could want to see is incredibly easy to find.

Google Fit is free and available everywhere

The best things about Google Fit are it's price and availability. As alluded to before, like most Google services it is entirely free and accessible anywhere. Download the app to your Android phone, spend 5 seconds activating it and you're good to go. There's no need to turn it on or off when you want to use it, once you're setup it just just keeps working. I am pretty deliberate with tracking my activity, it's fun for me, so I'm always looking at the app on my phone, or on my laptop (fit.google.com) to see how things are going. My wife doesn't care so much, but does like to see from time to time. She remembers her phone does this maybe once a week and very simply she can get a solid idea of how active she's been over the last few days, weeks or months. Of course, this depends on your phone being on you, unless you have a tracker or smart watch.

The availability is where I find the most piece of mind. Apple Health requires an Apple device, there is now Web version, so if you one day move to Android or Windows phone and your history is locked within Apple's walls. As said before, Google Fit being available via a browser adds a greater layer of openness for the long term. It's so handy to be able to look at my activity on my phone, tablet and laptop, and it pulls from most other notable fitness trackers to combine everything in one place is incredible. The value increases exponentially as I'll still be able to do so when I upgrade all of those devices. IT should be noted however that synschornisation isn’t perfect - at least not in real-time. Below is a photo of the web-site screen, my tablet and phone and as you can see the information is close, but not exactly the same. Past results all seem to be consolidated, for example the logs are all identical as of 2 days ago and earlier, but real-time and the day before seem to be be slightly conflicting.

While the slight glitch in across-device consistency isn’t perfect, this flexibility is the greater plus. Maintaining a healthy lifestyle is forever, so if you're in the camp that finds value in activity tracking, being locked into whatever device you're using in a given moment, and the possibility of losing everything if and when you change to something else is a big deal. You may use a step counter now, then take up running next year and therefore want a different device made by a specific running brand like Polar, change phone makers 2 years later, and who knows what else in the decades to follow. It pains me that the biggest line, Fitbit is refusing to partner with Google (or Apple) on this. Fitbits are great, but on a  personal level I don't like services that are built to lock me in.

There's no iOS app yet

The unfortunate and frankly, un-Google aspect is that there currently is not iOS app. The Google Fit app is exclusive to Android, just like Apple’s version, HealthKit is exclusive to iOS. This means that iPhone users can use Google Fit to keep their records, but the phone’s sensors can’t feed into Google Fit directly. That being said, Google has allowed access to developers for anyone who chooses to use their APIs, which means that most of the well known fitness apps, Nike, Strava, Adidas, Withings, Runtastic, RunKeeper, and MapMyFitness can all synch to Google Fit. So, if you use Strava to track your bike rides, Nike+ to track your runs, plus want a place to log your weight each week, Google Fit can be your one-stop-shop. It is bothersome that Google Fit is not available on iOS. Google Apps are usually written for Apple devices (Gmail, Drive, Google Maps, Google Play Music and Google Photos are all on iOS), as Google’s model is built on allowing everyone to use their services, so Google Fit may be coming. Long story short, if you have an Android device, you’re all set, if not, you’ll need a fitness tracker otherwise you’ll be entering things manually.

Overall

Google Fit is a free application for logging and tracking your physical activity and workouts. There’s no iOS app yet, but you can still access the app via the website which is a very big advantage. This, plus the fact that it can link to almost all other fitness tracking devices (i.e., Withings, Runtastic, Strava, Nike+, RunKeeper, etc) means that your activity will stay with you regardless of what watch, phone, wristband, tablet or laptop you find yourself using as the years go on. And, given that maintaining an active and healthy lifestyle isn’t a temporary endeavour, the ability to keep tracking your workouts, if you find so beneficial, regardless of what watch, phone or wristband you’re using is incredible.

The link to the website is fit.google.com and you can find the

Android app here

Is it healthy? Exercise

Here's a witty quip from The Guardian back in 2010, “since the days of the Green Goddess, we've known that the healthiest way to lose weight is through exercise. It's science, isn't it?

Well, science has some bad news for you. More and more research in both the UK and the US is emerging to show that exercise has a negligible impact on weight loss. That tri-weekly commitment to aerobics class? Almost worthless, as far as fitting into your bikini is concerned.”

While it may be outrageous to those spending hundreds of dollars and close to as many hours a month on classes, early wake ups, equipment, workouts and memberships, but at the end of the day, this is excellent news. For those that don't love strenuous, boring, painful or expensive exercise, science is on your side - you don't need to put yourself through torture just to be healthy.

The key to steady, long term health is food by a large margin. As the Guardian points out, there is an astounding amount of research pointing out to the relative insignificance and ineffectiveness exercise has compared to diet when seek health gains. Even further (and better), exercise that is typically more time consuming, boring and taxing on the modern  routine is even less worthwhile and especially if the main goal is weight loss.

Interestingly enough, this is not commonly believed. The unfortunate truth is high strongly the food industry tries to downplay the important of healthy eating as it promotes sugar drinks, carbohydrate-rich cereals, and whatever other chemicals or preservatives behind modern industrial food production. It’s been highly publicised that US First Lady Michelle Obama’s once admirable national healthy campaign was lobbied and negotiated down to emphasising physical activity and undercutting any message toward reducing sugar, processed foods and healthy eating all together. Out of curiosity, I posted a survey on Google+ asking people how important they believe exercise is in relation to food. While the science points to food being the definite key factor, the public believe otherwise. In other words, only about 20% have it right. Exercise is not as important as food when it comes to maintaining long-term health.

Nutrition (i.e., food) is way more important than exercise

There are many surveys and studies out there that create a clear cross-section of the research around the “diet vs exercise” relationship. “Which is more important - food or exercise?” is a fairly common Google search and the results seem to be definite. Of course both are necessary for good health, but food is way more important. A general rule of thumb seems to be evident where food intake dictates at least 75% of body composition with everything else (not just exercise) making up the rest. When thought about more deeply, the ratio is even less in favour of exercise. Many push this more towards an 80:20 rule. Food is 80%, and the remainder is exercise, plus things like sleep, stress, chemical and environmental exposures,

This 80% is largely influenced by insulin, the master hormone which is the engine behind metabolic and hormone function by transporting nutrients such as cabs, proteins and fats through the bloodstream to cells and organs throughout the body. Insulin response is almost entirely controlled by food intake and especially carbohydrate intake when it comes to weight management. The logic behind this makes sense when examining the numerous studies evaluating the effects of various levels of exercise when nutrition levels are equal across controls. If nutrition is the same, exercise doesn’t change much, but when exercise is the same, different food plans have immense effects.

Casual everyday activity is most of what’s necessary

Life is becoming increasingly sedentary these days. Few would argue against the growing difficulties in finding regular daily time for large chunks of traditional exercise like recreational sports, an hour to jog, or early morning or gym classes every other day. As a response, many take on the “weekend warrior” lifestyle of making up for 5 or 6 days of being seated in front of a computer with 1 or 2 hours of punishment via running or cycling. As much as people would like to think you can make up for a work-week of inactivity with a weekend of torture, most research suggests not just that this is ineffective, but also more harmful than good.

At first glance, walking may not seem to all too important as a form of exercise, but the body benefits most from activity - any activity, if done comfortably as much as possible - much more than prolonged painful exertion interrupted by days of inactivity. Walking intermittently totally up to an hour or two each day is far better than not, but running an hour 3 times a week.

More strenuous workouts can be quick and sparse

When it comes to exercise, frequent, slow and comfortable physical activity, such as walking is absolutely the most important ingredient. However the body also thrives when pushed to extremes. Strength training (Law #4 Lift heavy things) and high intensity workouts (Law #5 Sprint once in awhile) have their place as well and should be done regularly, but not nearly to the frequency most expect. Hitting the weights 5 times a week, each for a different isolated muscle group has it’s benefits to body builders and sculptors, but for those who would rather spend time on other things, a 30 minute set of pushups, pullups, planks and squats (modified for personal ability), once or twice a week is all that’s needed to be healthy and look great.

The effect of sprints or high intensity interval training (HIIT) is also incredibly useful. These extreme instances of distress jolt all of the body’s metabolic processes into high gear. The key is not to prolong them. Hill sprints, cross-ft, spin class and any other type of extreme heart-pumping session should be capped at 15-30 minutes with plenty of rest throughout to keep the body from going into survival mode. Sprint sessions that are too long lose their benefits and tend to risk injury, induce hunger, and deplete energy stores for more than is optimal.  Crafting a balance of these forms of physical activity that fits with personal circumstance is key, but the point still stands regarding which one is first.

For the majority of people that believe strenuous, painful, time consuming, boring and expensive exercise is a necessary evil in the pursuit of long term health, it’s not. For those that believe they have to eat tiny, unsatisfying meals that are pre-planned every 2 hours or risk headaches, starvation and irritability at the severe risk to your own and your co-workers’ well-being, is a necessary evil in the pursuit of long term health it's not. Despite conventional wisdom, while exercise is an important part of healthy living, it’s nowhere near as important as food and is actually insignificant and ineffective when it comes to managing weight.

It may be anecdotal, but many fall into the trap of eating a certain way so that they can workout as hard as they believe they need to in order to be healthy. A sugary bowl of carbs in the morning on the way to a torturous gym session is usually followed by a protein shake and meticulously planned fuel packets to make sure the next workout goes well. If this sounds harder than it should be it’s because it is. Optimal health is not about being able to run the fastest or the furthest. Nor is the person who wakes up an hour before sunrise 5 days a week for a 30km bike ride the epitome of physically fit. If you’re a competitor, or you love it, or a bit of both - then by all means do what makes you happy.

Is it healthy? Coffee

What constitutes as healthy, especially in terms of food can be a complex question to ask. It seems that for many foods, there are just as many people professing health benefits as there are proclaiming they'll lead to cancer, obesity, heart disease or dementia. In some cases it's also generational - eggs are healthy, then they're not, now they are again, and the same goes for margarine, rice, milk and dozens of other staple foods. It is not too hard to get people into a heated debate about carbohydrates. This is why so many people become frustrated and apathetic and end up leaning on two superficial sentiments that are wrong, right, superficial and insightful all at the same time.

Everything will kill you

This line falls closer to the apathetic side of the scale. Red meat will give you cancer, not enough meat will lead to iron deficiencies, not enough of certain fats will lead to dementia, grains will lead to diabetes, milk will cause indigestion and skin problems, too much sun will cause skin cancer, and not enough sun will lead to other cancers and mood disorders.

Everything in Moderation

This is the more optimistic view of things. Nothing is entirely healthy or entirely bad for you and therefore you can eat whatever you want as long as your portions are reasonable. It’s very much a common sense approach. Of course, pounding away a litre of ice cream every night or starting every morning off with a few doughnuts is unhealthy. Everyone knows that, but one of the most troublesome realities when it comes to health and nutrition is that many things, aren’t common sense. Green vegetables and almonds are good, and chocolate and colas are bad, but there are many things, where the situation is far more gray than people may realise. What does the research say about the foods with which the health profile isn’t entirely clear and common sense may not apply?

Is coffee healthy?

Coffee is one of the oldest drinks there is, dating back to at least the late 10th century. Like various teas, coffee has been enjoyed historically for centuries stretching from Turkey to Ethiopia. Like most time-tested, ritualistic foods, coffee is said to have been a key meditative, social and stimulating ingredient and therefore highly sought after by empires from North Africa, Persia, Asia and the Middle East.

http://www.hashslush.com/the-right-dose-of-caffeine-for-your-inspiration/

On the one hand, coffee is celebrated for numerous health benefits such as anti-oxidants, containing little calories, and being linked with lower incidence of conditions such as type 2 diabetes and Parkinson’s.  That being said, coffee is often maligned due to caffeine content, as well as high sugar and processing that comes with flavoured drinks lattes, cappuccinos and iced coffees that are popular today. These concerns come on top of the issues of caffeine such as connections to heart attacks, digestive problems and the nature of its addictive properties.

Of course though, it’s important to always remember that nutrition isn’t a scale of good and bad. It’s more of a quantum - foods are optimal in certain situations influenced by season, method of production and preparation and what else they’re consumed with - as well as the amount.

While the concerns around coffee are legitimate, most are associated to flavoured coffees. The processed creams and flavoured syrups from unknown sources are what do the real damage and should be avoided. As for the coffee itself, if taken without sugar or sweeteners, and with local, organic, full-cream milk if not black, coffee lovers should be at peace.

Coffee is the number one source of antioxidants. Research in emerging in 2001 from Harvard’s Nurses Health Study, has built toward the following highlights:

• A 2005 study exploring concerns that too much coffee was bad for blood pressure found no link between higher blood pressure and coffee and found some suggestion that it improved blood pressure.
• Regular coffee drinking was linked in a 2011 Harvard study to lower risk of a deadly form of prostate cancer.
• Also in 2011, a study showed that drinking four or more cups a day lowered the rate of depression among women.
• A 2012 study tied three cups a day to a 20 percent lower risk of basal cell carcinoma.
• A 2013 Harvard study linked coffee consumption to a reduced risk of suicide.
• Also in 2013, a Harvard analysis of 36 studies covering more than a million people found that even heavy coffee consumption did not increase the risk of cardiovascular disease and that three to five cups of coffee daily provided the most protection against cardiovascular disease.
• Also in 2014, Harvard Chan School researchers found that increasing coffee consumption by more than a cup a day over a four-year period reduced type 2 diabetes risk by 11 percent.
• The same study showed that those who decreased their coffee consumption by more than a cup a day increased their type 2 diabetes risk by 17 percent.

The overarching theme with almost all food and drink should be the premise that nutrition is a complex quantum of beneficial and hazardous influence. Some foods are absolutely healthy, others are the opposite, but most are not only somewhere in between, but in various areas of this scale depending on the production methods, combinations, and the metabolism and genetic properties of the individual consumer.

So is coffee healthy? Mostly, yes. The fears of caffeine are over exaggerated, and the antioxidant, metabolism, and brain stimulating contents justify this.  Just stay away from heavily sweetened flavoured varieties, and if you’re using milk, make sure it’s local and full-cream.

Why a balanced diet is wrong

“Everything in moderation” is a term that gets thrown around too frequently. It’s not exactly bad advice. The idea that you shouldn’t gorge on any one particular food, nor will a teaspoon of any other food bring about instant death. That being said, it does create an over simplified idea of how to handle nutrition and, worse than that, often comes built with the many erroneous byproducts of the conventional wisdom that has created the obesity, diabetes, cancer, dementia and Alzheimer's epidemics currently under way. Below are a couple of infographics that I’ve come across lately, promoting false information. I thought it may be interesting to pretend I’m a teacher and make the necessary corrections and provide some feedback.

Here is a very traditional diagram of a “balanced diet” that has been floating throughout the internet lately, and have seen many times over the years - I’ve taken the liberty of adding feedback I feel is important - correcting the errors of conventional wisdom and the decades old and flat-out wrong USDA food pyramid.

The reality is that some foods are healthy, some are not and the rest are somewhere in between these two. Further, the sources, production methods and even combinations of foods matter as well. Sugars in local fruits aren’t the same sugars in baked goods. Nutrients in spinach that is eaten as part of a salad don’t equal the same ingredients blended as a drink. You get the idea. Health, especially in regards to nutrition is a complex quantum of factors that react differently in different situations for different people.

Next we have a much more engaging diagram, not only guiding viewers through a balanced diet but also providing insights on somewhat well-known nutrition trending diets such as gluten-free, juicing, and paleo. The delivery is excellent and, as it’s pointed out there are several strong points of truth - but again there’s an overall theme of “everything in moderation” as if the tried and true “eat plenty of complex carbohydrates and cut out as much fat as possible” is throughout the graphic.

The confusion comes in prioritizing healthy food. What does a healthy meal look like? What should there be most of? How often of each type of food should there be? These are the simplest questions to answer and unfortunately, involve the most confusion amongst people. Here is the fairly loose set of proportions we try to live by in our house. I say “loose” in that it’s very much flexible.

The largest portion - vegetables (note: held separate from fruits) - is a large part of every actual meal. In other words, whenever a dish is involved and eating is the main action being taken, there are plenty of colourful vegetables such as carrots, broccoli, asparagus, capsicum, lettuce, spinach, etc. Visually, there are more of these than anything else for every sit down meal.

Second place - good fats and oils, and meat, fish, fowl and eggs - occupies most real meals as well. We cook with ghee, butter or coconut oil as close to 100% of the time as we can and whenever sauce or dressing is concerned, olive, almond, or macadamia oil are used. As far as animal flesh goes, local, grass-fed and organic takes priority and processed, frozen and imported meats are avoided whenever possible. It’s also important to note that unlike vegetables, meats aren’t always there. Every so often, perhaps once or twice a week, we prepare a meal that is entirely vegetarian. Again it’s not a rule as much as it is something we like to do and want to get better at from a “how good in the kitchen we are” standpoint. We’ve grown to appreciate the skill in preparing delicious animal-free meals and a certain distaste for the the cultural view that “it’s not a meal if there’s no meat” many people have. The important point is just that meat, in any form while incredibly important for a nutritious lifestyle, must take a backseat to vegetables both in health, and psychological perception.

Nuts and seeds, next on the list of the priorities, obviously aren’t major portions of any particular meal. Perhaps this is a good time to point out that the above pie-chart, even though is in the shape of a plate, does not represent one visually. It is not a matter of 15% of your plate should be almonds, but rather, that nuts and seeds, in various forms and portions should be a regular part of your diet. For us, these comes through handfuls in zip lock bags and small containers for snacks while watching TV or on the desk at work - instead of muffins, cookies, cereals, chocolate and other typical sugary or highly processed high carb high sugar snackfoods. We also find opportunities to mix them in as many meals as we can. Chia seeds, pine nuts, almonds, macadamia nuts, walnuts and Brazil nuts add a nice crunch to salads and stir-fries we’ve come to love.

The last two - dairy and fruits - are treated more as indulgences and personal needs rather than health staples. I enjoy a black coffee from time to time, but full cream frothy milk in my morning and afternoon coffee is probably one of my favourite things in the world. Milk also makes eggs better, and cheese makes everything better. While we have dairy frequently, it's in small amounts such as these rather than built into the majority of what we eat.

Fruit is handled the same way. We love local, fresh and seasonal fruit whether it’s blueberries, bananas or apples. The key is to be mindful of how high in sugar fruit can be. Of course they come with plenty of nutritional value, but the high level of carbs can throw off energy levels and create a dependency on sugar which gets in the way of the body’s best and most preferred source for energy - fat. Unlike vegetables, fruit is a treat - something to enjoy when the season is right and when something sweet is desired.

Healthy food priorities. The pie chart above is more used as a visual aid rather than based on any measurements. Truth be told, it’s not even clear what these portions are based on. They’re not based on calories or even volume. It's mostly a holistic approach to importance and frequency. How often we incorporate each food into our daily and weekly eating.

At the end of the day this doesn’t at all mean that there are no rules worth pursuing and paths worth taking. “Everything in moderation” is a superficial way of saying that you can eat whatever you want and as long as you don’t go overboard with any of it you’ll be fine. Of course this isn’t wholly true. There are some things you should eat more of, and some things you shouldn’t. This is similar to other common phrases that point out that “you gotta die sometime”. As profound as a thought this may be, this also doesn’t mean that because we’re all mortal, and that navigating through all the noise in pursuit of a healthy lifestyle is a complicated mix of misinformation, conflicting research, corporate interests and subjective opinion, that there’s no point in trying to seek out modifications to one’s lifestyle for the goal of a healthier, longer more comfortable, and less painful life.

Health benefits of red meat

A little while ago, the World Health Organization made occupied many major news feeds when it published a study linking processed meat and red meat to cancer risk. While the research behind this, and the findings published are entirely valid, much of the mainstream media ran with it is without truly understanding the piece. The key takeaways of the study were written about previously, but in short, the WHO is not recommending cutting red eat from a healthy diet, but instead acknowledging slight, yet distinct contributions to specific variations of cancer when red meat is heavily processed and cooked under harsh conditions. As always, it’s important to understand that health and well-being should not be taking as an absolute plus/minus formula, but a very complex quantum of correlated factors of contributions. In simpler terms, health, including cancer prevention is a fine and delicate balance and there are very few instances where doing as much as possible, or as little as possible, will absolutely lead to greater long-term well-being.

In regards to red meat consumption, this means it's important to understand the benefits as well as the dangers and decide for yourself. Below are the most significant, evidence-based health benefits that come with eating red meat.

One - red meat is a strong provider of protein and healthy fats

Protein doesn’t need much explanation in terms of benefits. Hair, nails, muscles, bones, and other essential components of the human body require protein to grow, strengthen and repair. Proteins are made up of building blocks called amino acids and it is without any doubt that animals are the richest sources of protein and contain all of the amino acids we need. Non animal sources such as fruits, vegetables, nuts, grains and seeds lack the same variety and wealth of these amino acids.

Animal fat however has had bad reputation for a few decades, but the research is coming through and people are beginning to understand that despite popular believe, red meat’s fatty profile is actually its strongest attribute. Animal fat, which is largely saturated fat is an excellent source of caloric energy, contribute to critical metabolic function and protects against oxidative damage. Unlike most cooking oils (seed and vegetable), animal fats found in the likes of coconut and palm oil, ghee, lard and butter hold up in extremely high temperatures and thus are resistant to oxidative damage making them optimal for cooking.

Two - red meat is a rich source of iron, zinc and B vitamins

Beef, lamb, goat and pork (which is counted as red meat here just to separate it from fish and poultry) are rich in necessary iron, zinc, vitamin D and numerous B vitamin levels. This much is relatively well known. What isn’t as widely aware is that red meat has significantly more b12, iron and zinc, and a much more beneficial fatty acid profile compared to fish and poultry. Where white meat like poultry and fish is generally a leaner source of protein with less fat, the vitamin, mineral and healthy saturated and monounsaturated fats indicate optimal nutrition involve both when sources locally, fresh, and free of chemicals, preservatives and hormones. Gentler cooking methods with minimal burning is advised as well.

Three - red meat is delicious and satiating

This last point may not seem as important as the other two, but it absolutely is - despite its subjectivity (not everyone likes red meat, which is totally fine). Due to the minimal carbohydrate and sugar content of red meat, as well as the high protein and healthy fats, all animal products, when produced locally, fresh and free of all things mass-agricultural, is more satisfying to the appetite than most other food sources. Regardless of personal tastes and preferences, meat is more likely to keep one fuller for longer, than fruits, vegetables, grains and sugars - even natural healthy sources.

Locally sourced, chemical and hormone free and Grass-fed is the way to go

Anecdotally, it’s more reasonable to someone to pound away inexplicable amounts of rice, pasta, carrots, cereals, or grapes than it is steak. Rarely would someone fill themselves up on strawberries or garden salad - yet even the best of people can imagine reaching a sleepy maximum at a slow-cooked rib festival. And, despite conventional wisdom, the reality that some foods satiate more than others is a part of the nutritional benefit those foods have. Life is dynamic, sporadic and sometimes even chaotic. The pursuit of having a similarly portioned, pre-planned meal every 2-3 hours may not be sustainable for the long term for most people. So, if opting for a fatty lamb chop rather than lean chicken breast, keep hunger off of your mind, throughout the day, than that, plus all of the other nutritional benefits that come with it, is a huge win. So the next time you’re enjoying a nice medium rare cut of grass-fed beef, don’t worry about cutting away that fatty strip, remember that not only is it delicious, but it may be the healthiest part of the meal. Enjoy.