SPEAKER 1: Welcome. ANDY GALPIN: Thank you. It’s a pleasure to be here. SPEAKER 1: Yeah. So Dr. Galpin, that’s quite
the resume you have there. So tell us a bit more about
your work at CSU Fullerton. ANDY GALPIN: So my primary
job is really threefold. Number one, I teach classes
in nutrition, performance, strength conditioning. We have, of course,
our laboratories. In the Center for
Sport Performance, we’ve got about seven different
laboratories, biomechanics, exercise physiology, sports
psychology, human performance, and motor control,
motor learning. So really our job is to
produce research that improves the human condition. We tend to focus on performance
and sport performance. But really, as the talk
probably evolves here, you’ll probably
start to understand how I think that is a
little bit more wide ranging than some people understand. So if you improve
sport performance, it’s also a very good
microcosm for understanding what improves that
general human condition. So with that being said, the
third tier, really, of my job is to disseminate
that information that we’re learning in a
lot of our laboratories and our studies to the
people that use it, whether that be the professional
athletes or the USC Fighters, or whether that be
you folks at home. That’s also why I do the
podcast and why I’m here today and why I wrote the book. And if you noticed
the tone the book, it’s written for
the general public. It’s not written like I
write my scientific papers. And that’s because we’re
trying to take things we learn in our
laboratory and put it into practice with the
people that are going to use it and benefit from it. SPEAKER 1: Got. it. And so how did you
go from leading a lab to working with Olympians
and professional MMA fighters? ANDY GALPIN: Well, that’s
really the same thing for me. They tend to be the participants
and the subjects in my studies because I’m trying
to learn how muscle functions at the high level. Specifically, what
we do in our lab is we learn what regulates how
muscle grows, shrinks, dies, and repairs. And it’s important to
understand that from the disease prevention treatment model. But it’s also
important to understand the other side of
the equation, which is let’s look at the athletes
who are the best in the world, because now we understand
what we’re trying to get to. And so there’s a very natural
crossover between these are the people I’m
trying to study. I’m learning
information about them. Well, then let’s take
the information I know and give it back to them
and see if we could actually change performance. And so it’s really circular. It works really well that way. I get something out of it. They get something out of it. So it is a natural blend. SPEAKER 1: So let’s first assume
that I’m a professional MMA fighter, which is highly
unlikely because I have terrible vision, tore my
meniscus, and no neck tattoos. ANDY GALPIN: And
you work at Google. SPEAKER 1: And I work at Google. ANDY GALPIN: So probably not. SPEAKER 1: Yeah. Yeah, probably not. Yeah, it’s probably not
a future career move. But let’s for a
second assume that. So would you work– would I only work with you? Or would you be part
of a crew, of a team? ANDY GALPIN: My
role, whenever I’m working with an athlete
or my mom or anybody else is to do whatever I need to
do to improve that person or to get them. And if that means you need to
work with me directly and only me, that’s fine. If you need me to be the
43rd person on your team, that’s absolutely fine. My goal is not to have
anyone ever do my system. I don’t have a system. My goal is to figure out what
your problem is and fix it. The easy example
here– and I’m going to show you how bad I
understand programming. But this works very easy. If you had a problem
with some software that wasn’t working
properly, you can’t just send the same piece of
code to fix everything. It’s easier to just look
at the current code, fix the one problem,
and then go back. That’s all I’m trying to do. And we have a major
fallacy of assuming everyone has the same problem. So the answer to
your question is I’m trying to find
whatever role I can to help the person
through their problem or to improve them if
they don’t have a problem. And so I’ve played every
role you can imagine. Some of the athletes
I work with, I’m pretty high at the top. And I’m determining
what’s going on. Some of them, it’s
very low-level stuff. I’m always trying to
encourage interaction with all their coaches,
their physicians, their staff members, their
agents, whatever I can to help them fix
the problem or improve what they’re trying to improve. That’s my circular goal. It’s about them not me. SPEAKER 1: Mm-hm. Yeah, and I suppose having
that approach makes it so that working with so many
smart folks, like they’re not stepping on one another’s
toes because you’re there for the individual
not for yourself. ANDY GALPIN: That’s probably my
single biggest piece of advice when working with an athlete. They have to understand that. Because they will see
right through that as well. A lot of people want to work
with professional athletes or any high-level
functioning person. It doesn’t matter if it’s
a professional athlete. They want to work
with that person so that they can level up. I want this person to
succeed so that they can go around and tell
the media that I got better because of Andy, right? And an athlete will
see right through that. And so you have to actually have
that altruistic nature where you’re saying, I’m just trying
to help this person because I want to help that person. If you do it because you
want to level up or get fame or fortune from it,
it’s not going to work. So my approach is that way
because I’m really genuinely trying to help them. Most of the athletes
that I’ve worked with have never mentioned me
on their Twitter feed. They’ve never posted about me. And that’s fine. That’s not why I do it. Occasionally, if they
do it, that’s great. But the point is to
help them get better. And in a job like mine, working
directly with the athletes is not actually part of my job. I have laboratories to run. You heard all the
things I’m doing. I’ve got classes to teach. I’ve got other service to do. I’m on national boards and
scientific advisory panels and things like that. So when I work with them, that’s
a hobby for the most part. It goes in that category in my
brain in terms of my workflow. And so I treat it
like that, which means I’m going to do this
from the altruistic perspective of it gives me enjoyment or joy. I enjoy it. And I like to help people. So if I think I can offer
somebody some help, I will. But I’m not doing it for me,
because I got names everywhere. I got books. I got titles. I got awards. It’s the last thing I need. It’s the last thing
I’m interested in. SPEAKER 1: Yeah. Something that really
stood out about your work, and I mentioned this to
you before we walked in, was that it’s both really
refreshing, but also really frustrating. Because I’m like, am I keto? Do I do know how to keto? Like, which diet
is the best for me? And I think that
there’s this idea that it’s a one-size-fits-all
mentality for both fitness and nutrition. And I was wondering if you
could speak a little bit on the nuance and kind of
the way you would approach, let’s say, forming a diet for
a high-performing Olympian? ANDY GALPIN: I think the best
way I can set this whole story up is a few years ago,
my students walked into my classroom on the last
day before the final and told me that they weren’t
going to take the final, that they just hadn’t– they pulled out from their
bag a big bag of diapers. And they said, this is our
answer for every question because the answer is
always, it just depends. Right? There’s a time delay
in the joke there. I know. Give it a second. But that’s what you’re referring
to in terms of frustrating, because that is
always the answer. Physiology is so complex. And the reason– even if
you had 2 or 200 people that had the same, quote
unquote, “problem,” it may not have the same
reason why the problem’s there. And so if you give them
the same treatment, it may or may not be effective. And so I never give
people blanket statements. I will use any
tool to fix a job. And oftentimes you
have innumerable tools that could fix it. And you have to go to your next
level of thinking and logic to figure out which one do I
choose, because 1,000 of them could. I mean, an example up here, I’ve
got two different water bottles up here. They’re not identical. And if my problem was
hydration, there’s pros and cons to both approaches here. And so I’m not trying
to just say, all right, everyone drink this
because it’s better. Everyone drink this, don’t
drink this because it’s worse. I want to look through every
piece of evidence, what all possible could be going
on here, what all’s possible going on here, and
understand the pros and cons of implementing
that in for my solution. And that’s always what’s
going through my brain. We’ll get to this,
I’m sure, in a second, but there’s no free
passes in physiology. Everything does something. And so you have to consider
both the potential help and the potential consequence
of anything you implement, whether that’s food
or that’s supplement, whether it’s a sleep
thing, it’s technology. Of course, this is
what the book is about. There are pros and
cons to everything. Everything has an effect. And now when you start
putting that into a system, like physiology,
that is so complex, you have to understand
when you turn a switch, it doesn’t go on and off. It does a bunch of different
things in physiology. So the game board is
constantly moving. When you adjust one piece,
it doesn’t just do one thing. It adjusts 1,000 other
things millions, millions of other things really. And so you have to
factor all that stuff in. And at the end of the
day, you’re guessing. And anyone that says anything
different in mechanical biology or perhaps the software
stuff, math is very clear. You do this. It turns into that. Physiology does
not work like that. It is way too complex. It’s biology. It’s too moving, right? The understanding or clarity of
truth in biological or medicine is really, really
difficult to get to. And so you have to
have that humility when you treat people, when
you work with athletes, understanding I think this is
how it’s going to work based on my experience and the
evidence and everything else I’ve been through. But at the end of the
day, you don’t know. You’re just guessing. SPEAKER 1: So what would be
an example of that trade off? Like, let’s say the
example I’ve heard you use before is like vitamin C. Yeah. So can you show a little
bit about the counterbalance of taking in vitamin
C as a supplement? ANDY GALPIN: Well, I mean,
I’ll make an easier one. Vitamins and minerals
are the easy go to because if you just take
vitamin C prophylactically, so you just took it
all day every day, there’s consequences to that. It has extreme toxicity. The idea here is
called hormesis, which means there’s a
toxicity curve to everything. And water, I’ll go here because
it’s an even easier example which sets the point better. How many of you would be
willing to stop drinking water the rest of your life? Right, not too many
hands going up there. So you would all agree
being very low in hydration is a problem, right? And you’ve heard
this 1,000 times. Drink more water. It’s better for you, right? Do you all realize that
if you drink enough water, that will kill you? You all know this, right? There is the toxicity
curve with water. The most inert thing on the
planet has a toxicity curve. If you drink too much of it, you
get what’s called hyponatremia. The sodium, potassium
pumps the things– the reasons why you have
an electrical gradient between the muscles that cause
contraction becomes diluted. Nothing pumps. The heart stops pumping, right? There’s is a toxicity
curve to water. I’ll use an easier one. How many of you are willing to
go 15 minutes without oxygen? [INTERPOSING VOICES] ANDY GALPIN: Do you also
realize oxygen is probably the most toxic
thing on the planet? Like, this is rust, right? This is oxidized. This is the problem here. So vitamin C is no different. Pick your mineral. Iron is a big one in men. Sometimes men have
too much iron. Women have the same problem. If you just give people
prophylactic iron, especially women– this is a
common one we see because of the menstrual cycle. We’ll just give women more iron. Well, fantastic that causes all
kinds of oxidative problems. It causes all kinds
of damage to DNA. There’s a ton of
issues with that if you’re giving them too much. So you can’t just
give people things. This is what I
said a minute ago. There are no free
passes in physiology. Nothing is good. Nothing is bad. Look, you have to stop
thinking about molecules and personifying them. Like, there’s no little evil
body in the water molecule who’s like, yes, let
me get the human. I will get it, right? Or, oh, I just want
to help people, right? That [INAUDIBLE] movie “Inside
Out,” or whatever it was? SPEAKER 1: Yeah, about the– ANDY GALPIN: The
molecules are not people. A piece of water
doesn’t give a– I almost said a
different word word– doesn’t care if you’re happy
or sad or anything like that. Vitamin C is not toxic for you. You pick the worst, most
toxic thing on the planet. It doesn’t have a personality. It doesn’t care. SPEAKER 1: Even sugar? ANDY GALPIN: Yes, sugar. Like, sugar doesn’t hate you. None of these things–
it’s always about hormesis, where is it on the curve. And the crazy thing is
pick any of these vitamins, minerals, or any
pharmacologically developed item. At some point, it
can save your life. It could be that the thing
that changes how you feel. It could also be the thing
that kills you or makes you feel worse. If you go further, it kills you. So this is what I mean
with all those things. You have to understand where
you’re at on that curve. And a large part of it is
you can get blood work done. But that’s a very crude measure. Really, it’s about
understanding how you feel, because your body
will tell you things. And it turns out
nature’s figured out a lot of this hormetic
curve pretty well. The amount of
minerals, for example, vitamin C, that you
can get through nature are generally fine. Hardly any of you are likely
to be past the hormetic curve where you’re going to have
physiological problems by consuming too many oranges. You’re not going to
get that much vitamin C because there’s not that much
vitamin C in the orange, right? It has a dosage that
says this is probably going to be appropriate. Where you can get
into a problem, though, is taking
things at dosages that are way higher
than normal in nature, so super concentrated exogenous
things like a pill, right? Now, you can get grams
of vitamin C at a time. This is something you
would have never gotten in the natural world. And you have to be
careful here of not making the natural fallacy, which
is that just because things are this way in nature,
that means it’s good. That’s not true. But it is fairly
reasonable in this context to say that the sugar
would be the same thing. We could certainly
dive into that. It’s not the fact that there’s
too much sugar in a carrot, right? It’s the fact that the way that
people often consume sugar now, it’s in extremely
concentrated forms that would have not–
you would have had to eat four bundles
of carrots to get that much sugar or a beet,
for that matter, too. So that’s really the issue
with all those things is we’re not
consuming those things or we are consuming those things
in concentrations or dosages that our physiology is
not really prepared for. SPEAKER 1: So then to bring it
back it back to the local level then, how can we
take that information and apply to it to our
day to day here at Google? Is there like a best practice? Do you just, like, adjust your
eating based on the activity that you do? ANDY GALPIN: Turns out
there is a best practice, and it’s all laid
out right here. SPEAKER 1: Nice. ANDY GALPIN: Just kidding. I’m not really. But that’s really what
I’m talking about. The best practice, number one,
is to treat the problem, not the symptom. That’s the issue. So, for example, we’ll just
keep writing about vitamin C since you brought it up. Why do people generally take
vitamin C prophylactically? SPEAKER 1: They feel sick
or about to get sick. ANDY GALPIN: Perfect, right? If you’re taking that all the
time because every two or three weeks you feel like
you’re getting sick or you are getting sick, that
will cover up the symptom. It may even fix it. But what’s the problem? Something in your lifestyle
or diet or nutrition or sleep is wrong. That’s why you
keep getting sick. So you need to fix that problem. Now, you can take the
vitamin C once or twice or something when
you’ve got a crazy month and you’ve got to
get this project or you’re over–
all right, fine. But you have to realize that is
the symptom that your body is trying to tell you’re
doing something wrong. So at some point, you have got
to go back and fix the problem, right? And that could be a
whole bunch of things. It’s terribly boring. But I generally will apply the
same problem or the solution for that problem to everyone. You’re probably not sleeping
well and consistently. You’re probably not eating
enough high-quality food. You’re probably eating too
much low-quality things. And you’re probably not getting
enough physical exercise. Like, most boring
talk ever, right? It turns out it’s
really, really true. That’s why we say it right. Cliches are there for a reason. Stereotypes are
there for a reason. They’re generally pretty
true most the time. SPEAKER 1: Like, at the general
level, they’re pretty accurate. ANDY GALPIN: At the general–
very general level, right? But that’s what they’re
there for, though. We’re trying to generalize. We’re trying to give big
sweeping recommendations for everybody. And turns out those are the
sweeping recommendations that work really well. So we’ll get to this
concept right now, I guess. I think the easiest way I can
explain this is on two ends here. Over here you have optimization,
and this is something actually very applicable to all of you. And over here is adaptation. So one of the things you have
to realize about physiology, when you’re optimizing,
you’re not adapting. Or you can think of it
as you’re super adapting. So if you’re walking around
at all times optimizing, you’re actually
causing the system to be more reliant
upon that optimization. I’ll give you an example. The easy one I can pick
on here is caffeine. So how many of you out
there are willing to work– we’re in a trust circle here. Don’t worry. I’m only judging everything
you’re doing right now. How many of you are willing
to acknowledge that you’re a daily consumer of caffeine? SPEAKER 1: I like to party. ANDY GALPIN: I like to party. Virtually every
hand goes up, right? How many of you think your
day is significantly enhanced or improved by that caffeine? How many of you– we’ll keep
going one step further– are actually willing to admit
that if you were to not get that caffeine dose in the
morning, your productivity or some other function
you see as positive would be compromised? Right. So what happens with
caffeine over time to your ability– or its
effectiveness over time? SPEAKER 1: Diminishes? ANDY GALPIN: So you’re
optimizing by taking that– and I’m not against caffeine. I’m going to go against
this entirely in a second. I just picked this one
because it’s a very easy one. I knew all of your hands
would go up, right? Like, I get it. I’m a full time scientist,
I run laboratories I teach four classes a semester. I write books. I do things like this. I don’t have any
time either, right? I work with athletes. We’re all in that
same time crunch. I truly believe most people
work about equally hard, right? None of us have any free time. So you’re constantly optimizing. You’re doing what makes
you feel the best right now because you’ve got to
get this thing done. But then what happens is
another project comes up. And then another project comes. And you end up in
this constantly optimizing everything, right? I’m taking my nootropic. I’m taking my other
vitamin C pill so I don’t get sick, right? I won’t fix the lifestyle stuff. I’ll optimize
everything right now. I’ll take all the caffeine I
can to get through this project, right? But then I need more
and more and more. And then eventually
what happens, boom, you blow to pieces, right? Physiology shuts down
because it became so reliant on the technology,
what happens if you stop taking that caffeine? Headache, withdrawal
symptoms, right? All these problems happen. And you’re like, oh, my gosh, I
can’t stop taking the caffeine because you chose optimization. SPEAKER 1: Is that the
same thing with diet? Like, if I were to be
100% keto and then I couldn’t get that type of food
and switch to something else, would there be a
similar reaction? ANDY GALPIN: Similar idea. But, yeah, you’ve
become what we would say is non-resilient, right? You don’t want to put
yourself in a position where you can’t handle things. You want to have some grit. So I actually think it’s great
when people say, hey, look, I know if I do these four or
five things in the morning, I become extremely
clear and productive. That’s good. I want you all to
know those things. I just don’t want you to
choose those every single time. So in the book,
we talk about you have to engineer and
manufacture suffering sometimes. You have to choose the
hard path sometimes. And you do that so
that this doesn’t get slid too far to the right. Because you end up
optimizing so much, that optimal doesn’t
work anymore. You’ve got to optimize more
and again optimize more. And now we’re no longer
having an effect. And what do you think has
happened to the physiology? If you have to have caffeine
to wake up in the morning, what do you think happens to those
endogenous processes that are there to help you wake up? SPEAKER 1: They become dull? ANDY GALPIN: De-sensitized,
they go away. And eventually, years
later, months later, weeks later, whatever happens
to me, this becomes a problem. And so the answer
to your question, what’s the actionable step,
what can we do here at Google, is, yes, sometimes
have caffeine or have whatever you’re looking for. And, again, caffeine’s
just the one to pick on. But then sometimes
say, you know what? I’m going to perform today. I’m going to execute. I’m going to be focused
today without that stuff. Help the body learn to go
back the other direction too so that it learns to do that. So you don’t have to
have those things. You don’t have to have 250
grams of fat a day just to not feel foggy headed. If that’s a problem,
you should learn to build in what’s called
metabolic flexibility. So I’ll grant you, some
people are probably very dominant on
carbohydrate, overly dominant. But that doesn’t mean
you should become overly dominant fat burning either. That’s just the same thing, but
the other end in the spectrum. I want people to be able to
do both, go back and forth. So if you’re in a situation
where a lot of carbohydrates are available, you
can consume them or you want to, for
1,000 reasons you just want to have some carbohydrate. I want you to have the
physiology to go through that and not blow up the next
day or eight days later or fall asleep or whatever other
silliness people say, right? Same thing with fat. I want you to also not
have to go through your day without having to
have carbohydrate. I think that is also
equally a problem. I [? think ?] it’s very clear
this is an issue, right? So your gut health, your brain
function, your energy level should all have the
resiliency to handle multiple different stimuli. But this is where we’re
going to be optimal. And the more time you can, say,
pushing away from optimization, spending on adaptation,
the more things get better. You don’t need to do
those things as much. So again, I’m not
saying, all right, let’s throw away all
the other things. Let’s go back to just living
on water and broccoli and– no. I’m just saying sometimes
choose suffering. Sometimes choose optimization. And if you can
think to yourself, oh, boy, you know what? I haven’t chosen
suffering in a long time. Well, then its probably time
to choose some suffering. I don’t know if that’s
weekly, monthly. I don’t know what it is. It doesn’t matter. But just having that–
and this is actually why the last word the
book is consciousness. Just having that awareness
to go, oh, yeah, all right, and maybe it’s time
that I sleep for 10 hours for 5 straight days. It’s really
interesting what people will choose to suffer with. Some people will choose to
suffer through exercise, but they won’t suffer
through any hunger. Or they won’t suffer
through eating something. They go, I don’t like that. Like, what? You ran 20 miles
yesterday, but you won’t eat something because
you don’t like the taste of it? That last five seconds. That’s a crazy thing. Some people will work and
sleep five hours a night for weeks on end. But they won’t do
the opposite end of the spectrum, which is,
OK, choose five days in a row where you sleep for 10 hours. They won’t choose
that type of suffering because they don’t like it. They’re bored, or I’m agitated. I can’t sleep at
night, so I’m going to pull out my phone again. No, no, no, no. Put that away. That’s your suffering is not
checking your phone every two seconds. Whatever your suffering
happens to be, pick something that’s
hard and just make sure– and I use these
examples like caffeine. But I want really– the goal of the book
and the goal right here today is to help you
think about other aspects of your life. Maybe that’s paying attention
to your wife more, right? Maybe that’s not reacting to
somebody in traffic as much. Choose the optimization. Choose what feels good. Choose what gets you fixed
the fastest right now. But then sometimes
choose what’s going to be the long-term solution. And it’s the same
thing I talked about. This is fixing the problem
versus the symptom. The symptom is I woke
up today exhausted. I got to get a
bunch of stuff done. The symptom is fatigue. But the problem was lifestyle. The problem was lifestyle. So balance those two things. SPEAKER 1: Yeah, something
I’ve noticed a lot, and this might have come up
a couple of times before. But it’s I feel that our
peer group, especially here at Google, we’re
all around the same age. We do similar activities. But we try to optimize
for too many things. Like in my own personal case,
like, try to be ketogenic and also do jujitsu. And half way through a roll,
I mean, you practice the sport as well, I’m like
halfway through the roll, I’m just like, yeah, I’m
going for that, I’m dead, man. Like, I can’t do anything else. And so I had to
switch back to, OK, like let’s get
more carbs in you. Let’s get you a little
bit more ready in full so that when you’re
rolling, like, those carbs are activating. You have that energy. like I couldn’t do
both at the same time. And so I had to pick
one or the other. ANDY GALPIN: Yeah. And that’s a very good example. When you try to make
changes, so sometimes you have to be realistic
with expectations, right? Not sometimes, pretty much all. In that particular case,
you had to understand what a true goal is. Are you trying to get to
better jujitsu right now? Are you trying to
get keto adapted? Because sometimes those things
are going to be antithetical. You have to understand– if you
don’t make that decision what the true goal is a
priori, you’ll never get to get to that change. Because when things
get hard, you’re going to start making the
change in your decision, right? So the goal has to be I’m
going to get keto adapted. That means– if
you’re wanting to. I will stay with keto. If that means jujitsu
suffers right now, fine. I have to do that, because
I have to recognize the goal is over here. Or if the goal is
to be getting better at jujitsu for that week, month,
block, whatever it happens to be– this is strength and
conditioning programming 101, right? Have a goal for the day,
week, month, quarter, year. Then understand be
true to that goal. So when things
start going wrong, you look back up the
chain and go, yeah, well, the goal of this week was this. And the goal this
month was that. Therefore here’s my decision. And I understand
what to optimize for and what to push
towards [INAUDIBLE].. SPEAKER 1: And so that
ability to change up your eating style, so would
that also apply to working out? Like is there a variability
in strength and conditioning too that you would recommend? ANDY GALPIN: 100%. There should be variability
with all of these things. You should look
at your lifestyle, whether that’s your nutrition,
your exercise programming stuff, and think,
when is the last time I did something different? You should think
globally, right? So how many of you
think it’d be good to do the same workout every
day the rest of your life? I got eye roll there, right? Of course that doesn’t
make any sense. Then why do you think there’s
one eating style you should do the rest of your life? That doesn’t make any
sense either, right? So you shouldn’t just be
keto the rest of your life. You shouldn’t be carb heavy
the rest of your life. You shouldn’t do any of these
things the rest of your life. You can if you want. But there’s no real reason
that you should– there’s one way to eat ever. But yet there’s 1,000
ways to exercise. It doesn’t make
any sense, right? If you start going back
up the logic train, you start thinking, what am I
trying to do with the exercise? And many of us have different
goals, including things like I’m trying
to get healthier. I’m trying to lose
weight, right? Or I want more energy. When you think about what
the goal is, that actually determines the
outcome, as opposed to working backwards,
which is to say, I’m going to do this program. Why? Because my friend
did it and loved it. That goes back to
what we said earlier. Well, your friend might
have been doing it for a different reason. Or it’s super popular
for a different reason. You have to think about what
are you trying to get out of it. And this is– I
won’t do this one right now because I’m sure none
of you want to be this honest. But generally you’ve,
I’m sure, heard the rule of three whys, W-H-Y, right? It’s three to five. But when somebody comes
at you with a problem in the terms of
nutrition or diet and you say I want to get x. Why? Why do you care about that? Why do you care about that? Why do you assume if you
did this, it would do that? And that’s always
what it comes down to. There’s almost always
a broken assumption. Why are you assuming if you
eat less carbohydrates you’re going to lose more fat? Well, it just makes sense. That’s it? You’re going change your whole
lifestyle because of that? Oh, well, what do you
really want to do? I really want to lose fat. Great. So if I give you a
plan to lose fat, would you be happy, yes or no? Yes. If you loss the fat, would
you be happy, yes or no? Yes, I would be. Great. Well, then, I’m going
to use whatever tool I can to help you lose fat. You brought a solution. You brought an option there,
which is a fine option. But I’m going to look at the
rest of the things and say, that’s not going to
work in your lifestyle. I know you’ve got kids. I know you’ve got
this thing going on. This is not– this is very
unlikely to succeed for you. So can I offer
you another option that I think is more
likely to succeed that will get you to that goal? That’s what I’m after. That’s what we’re always doing. So with exercise,
it’s the same thing. What are we trying to do here? I’m trying to– well,
my mom had osteoporosis. So I want to make sure
I don’t have that. Oh, OK. Or my dad just had
a heart attack. And so I’m really thinking
about long-term health. Or, hey, look, it’s summertime. It’s Venice. I need to get ready
to pop this shirt off. Fine. Whatever it happens to be,
let’s get to the honest answer. And people are shocked
because I don’t care. I actually don’t think vanity
is the worst thing ever here. If that drives you
to exercise more, OK, that that can be
a problem at the end of the hormesis curve. It’s like anything else, right? But for a lot of people,
fine, if that’s what it takes. Well, then let’s
talk about that. And now we’re going to work
backwards to figure out what program or
style of training you need to do to get
that goal, as opposed to just picking a
style of training. Like, that doesn’t
make any sense at all. And then of course,
when the goal changes, now we’re going to rotate
training philosophies based on what the next goal is. SPEAKER 1: Yeah, and so speaking
of training and genetics, like how much of what
you have is like fixed? Like, assuming
again that I become the best Mexican-American UFC
fighter ever, how much of that is limited by what
I already have, or can I completely
change my build? Or am I kind of
just stuck as is? ANDY GALPIN: Yeah. So we’ve actually
ran a recent trial with [? some monozygotic ?]
twins. So these are twins that
have the exact same DNA. So they’re clones. And one of them had
stopped exercising when he was about 18 or 20 years old. And the other one had
continued to exercise. And at the time
when we tested them, they were in their early
50s, so really 30 years of different exercise training. And while everything
that you in your body is slightly different
here, generally at worst, you’re talking about 50/50
genetics and lifestyle. Some of the markers,
more aggressive, some of the things
we saw were closer to 80/20 in favor of
lifestyle not genetics. The exposome is what some
people refer to this– anything not genetic. So it depends on what
you’re talking about. If you’re talking
about something like how tall you are, that’s
pretty much 100% genetic, right? There’s not a lot we can do. Sorry. But if you look at something
like your overall health, or I’ll pick maybe a
more specific example. We took muscle biopsies, and we
analyzed them for fiber type, right? So most of you heard
this, fast twitch muscle fibers and slow twitch, right? Well, unlike what
most people think, there’s tremendous
plasticity within that. So you can swing back. You can go from fast to slow,
slow to fast really quickly. We’ve seen changes in fiber
type in as short as two weeks, 11 days really. And in this particular
case, one of the twins was about 50/50 fast
twitch to slow twitch. And the other one was
about 90% slow twitch. So I really basically for
things like again height, you can’t really change. But anything that has
any plasticity to it, there really is no limit
to how much it changes. It only comes down to exposure. So the more often you do it,
the longer you have to do it. For example, if I
took these twins and I had another 100
years to keep them going, they would continue to change. It’s not a physiological limit. It’s just a limit to exposure,
time and load, right? And so you have
unlimited ability to change virtually
anything about you if you give it enough exposure. So that means you
have to be patient and you have to do things often. If you’re consistent
and you do it often and you wait time,
basically anything about your body, your
physique and especially things like muscle, we
have virtually no limit to plasticity
within our lifestyle or within our lifetime
at this stage. So everything really can change. SPEAKER 1: Got it. Now, how related is that to
like the idea of epigenetics, that some [? things ?] turn off
and depending on what you do? Does this go back to the twin
example that you just shared? ANDY GALPIN: Yeah, that
is one example of that. So you have genes
that you can’t change. You can’t change the DNA
that you’ve inherited. But we’ve been doing
this for decades now. The idea that just
because you have a gene, doesn’t mean that gene
is going to be expressed. If that gene is not expressed,
no proteins are built. No proteins are built,
nothing happens. So somebody that, say,
that gets a bad draw, because certainly people
get better draws genetically and some get worse. So for let’s say– I’ll give you an
example, myself. I’ve done a bunch
of genetic testing. And I have a lot of
markers for obesity. And so if you calculate
the rough numbers, I have something like 15
or 16x the risk of obesity. And I’m not the
best-looking person you’ve ever seen with
their shirt off over there at the beach, but it’s
not too bad, right? Everyone else in my
family is obese– everyone, for the most part. I have the same– I have very bad genetics when
it comes to those things. I have to work very hard in
my exercise and nutrition. It’s not just natural. I wasn’t born with
a fast metabolism. That’s all garbage, right? I have the genetic
markers that give me every excuse to be obese. But if I don’t match
that with the lifestyle, those genes are never going
to really matter that much. If, though, I gave my
lifestyle a little bit, it would take off. Some people get a
lot– some people have much higher on the obesity
thing than I, and they [? matched ?] that. They eat pretty well. Their lifestyle’s pretty good. But that’s enough to really
send them off the edge, right? And so they have
to work really hard and do everything to
just kind of stay there. Some people are on the
other end of that spectrum. Doesn’t really
matter what they do, they’re not going to be on
the surface level obese. But keep in mind, a
major misnomer here is skinny is not
healthy, and obese is not unhealthy necessarily either. Adding more fat mass
is generally never a good thing for your health. But just because you’re not fat,
does not mean you’re healthy. And we have tremendous data on
this of hundreds of thousands of people now in dozens of
studies across laboratories across the world. Some of the most significant
predictors of mortality, so this is when
you’re going to die, are things like leg strength. It’s not obesity. It’s things like VO2 max. It’s not your cholesterol. So you could be somebody
who is, quote unquote, “skinny,” have weak
legs, have a low VO2 max, and be at two to three times,
if not higher, the mortality risk of somebody who’s
a little bit overweight, but they have a reasonable
VO2 max and a reasonable leg strength because they’re active. Like, if you want to
talk about health, that’s what health means. So it really depends
on are you talking about aesthetics or health? But those are different
conversations. Just because you’re not fat
does not mean you’re healthy. You can be right above
that line of dying. SPEAKER 1: Got it. And so speaking
of lifestyle, you have this wonderful
analogy where you describe the
differences in terms of eating between a cook,
a baker, and a chef. I would love for you to share
a little bit about that. ANDY GALPIN: So
like any analogy, it’s not perfect, right? But what I try to do
is, as I mentioned, it’s a little bit a blend of the
soft sciences and hard science. I’m a hard scientist, right? It’s quantitative,
or it’s qualitative. Everything in my
world is quantitative. Biopsy, you measure everything. Molecules, we measure singling
proteins, genes, like that. And there’s no fudging. There’s no, well,
you look pretty good. That doesn’t work in
muscle physiology. But the soft sciences are
more qualitative, right? And so what I try
to do is when I’m speaking to a client, an athlete
or even a student or even my parents, or you
right now, there’s two conversations
that go on my head. Conversation number one
is, what’s the information? What’s the thing
I’m trying to say? Conversation number
two is what’s the best way I need to say it to
you to have the impact, right? If I gave you every piece of
information, I know in my head, you can’t execute. And oftentimes that confuses
you even more and makes you go, I’m out. Like, I just wanted
to one answer. I want to start taking
vitamin C. Do I do it, yes? No? I’m out. So you have to have
two conversations going to translate what I think
I need to say to you. So my analogy that I make up
with the cook, baker, and chef is my way of putting people
in personality categories for one simple metric
which is nutrition. That helps me understand how I
need to communicate with them. And it actually
works really well because people fall
into this cook, baker, chef analogy in every
aspect of their m but you may switch back. So when you go to work here in
a second, you might be a baker. But then with your own
nutrition, you might be a cook. So people aren’t just a cook or
a baker in all aspects of life. It changes depending
on the roles. So for example, for me– and
I’ll get into what this cook, baker, chef thing
is in a second. For nutrition, I am
definitely a cook. But when it comes to my taxes,
not the same way, right? When it comes to fixing my car,
I’m totally a baker, right? I’m following every instruction. I’m not– SPEAKER 1: This might go here. Just put that there. ANDY GALPIN: Right. So these analogies,
do any of you know the difference
between cooking and baking? I sort of just gave you a hint. Baking is chemistry, right? Baking is extremely precise. You cannot do things in
different orders when you bake. You can’t be like, well, I’ll
just get the baking powder out. Just toss some in. Not going to work. Like, was that baking
soda or baking powder? I can’t remember. Just throw them in. Ah, put a little bit of both. Not going to work
in chemistry, right? SPEAKER 1: The YOLO
move, just put them both, see what happens. ANDY GALPIN: Yeah,
exactly, right? Generational. It’s Millennials. It’s what you do, right? Cooking is that, though, right? Cooking is, well, OK, yeah,
you just kind of get it hot. Put it in the pan. And put a little bit of
this, put a a little bit that in there. Well, it doesn’t really matter
if you have onion or not. Well, OK, I add it. It’s going to kill it. Just kind of toss
things around, right? So people process
information the same way. How many of you, if I said,
look, for having me up here today, I’m going actually go
ahead and offer you my services for free for the next 30 days. I’ll be your personal
nutritionist the next 30 days no charge. How many of you,
if I said, look, I will write you a
specific program. I’ll tell you exactly
what to eat, when to eat. You have to weigh. You have to buy a little scale. You have to weigh every
single thing you eat, and you have to
report it back to me. And if you fail
one meal, I’m out. How many of you would
love something like that? Right? How many of you are like, what
if we met like once a week for 30 minutes or an hour. You could ask me a
couple questions. I’ll gave you some concepts
and then you went back. How many of you would like that? Right. You are a baker. You’re cooks. If we work together, and now
especially if you paid me– if you’re paying me
$1,000 a month to do this and you wanted that
kind of information at that level of detail, and all
I gave you was, well, you know, just eat a little more protein. You’d be pissed, right? You’d be freaking out. The great example,
I think, of all time is my wife, because she is a
baker when it comes to food. So when I first started helping
her years ago with nutrition, I’d be like, oh, OK, just eat
a little bit of walnuts today at lunch. She’d be like, whoa,
what do you mean, like eight almonds
or walnuts, 11? What are we talking about here? She came. She’s a baker. Plus she came from that
counting calorie thing. She came from all this. And it gave her anxiety to
not have that information. You, if I gave you
all that information, it would give you anxiety
because you’re like, oh, my god, it’s
controlling my life. It’s too much. So even though the answer to all
of your nutritional problems, we’ll just say, is
the exact same thing, I cannot communicate to you
how I communicate to the rest of you. It’s going to be ineffective. So I have to have that
second conversation, which says, OK, how does she want
to hear this information? And what do I need to tell her? I can’t give her too much. I can’t give her too little. There’s a thing
called buy in, right? You’ve got to be convinced and
excited it’s going to work. And it’s going to be overload. I got to make sure that
I’m trying to line you up with buy in, as well as
feeling good about, yeah, no, but I see why you
gave me walnuts because this was going on. And I see why you added
this because we were here. Perfect. That’s going to fix my problem. You might not care about that. You’re like, look, I just want
to be little bit less fat. Give me some ideas. What am I doing wrong? Cool. And you’re really
empowered by that. You’re excited by that. Versus added anxiety
to your plate, right? So bakers need to be given very
specific instructions, even, here’s the secret, even if those
instructions aren’t perfectly right. It doesn’t really matter. I don’t know if you need to be
on 180 grams of carbohydrate or 280. But if I told you that,
you wouldn’t be happy. But if I walked out and
said, oh, yeah, no, you need to be at 175 exactly. Don’t go to 190. Be at 175. And you went, oh, sweet, great. And then I turn and
went, I don’t know. You would rather
hear that than not hear that because
you have a plan. Some of you are planners, right? Some of you like that detail. We can adjust the plan as we go. So are you going in a week
come back to me and go, look, I’m feeling,
bom, bom, bom, bom. Oh, OK, let’s take those
carbs, and let’s go up to 220 and see what happens. OK, great. You just like having a plan. Like, some you don’t want that. That’s too much. It’s going to take
over your life. You’re not going execute it. And the number one thing with
diet nutrition, the number one thing to actually changing
something is adherence. If nobody does the plan,
then there is no plan. So my cook, baker,
chef thing is trying to help people put them in a
position where they actually might execute the plan. So give them something they’re
going to be excited about but doesn’t give
too much anxiety. Now, what’s a chef? Is a chef following
recipes or not? SPEAKER 1: No really. ANDY GALPIN: Why can a
chef not follow recipes? Because they followed the recipe
exactly for so many years, they have an advanced
degree in that. And now they understand
when to break those rules. They understand
the consequences. They understand how things
are working to a level. They can innovate. They can do things differently
because they know, OK, well, I’m going to do less
of that, but I’ve got to do this in the back end. A cook doesn’t have that
experience or knowledge. They didn’t put in
the ground work, the years of working,
to understand, no, you can’t just
throw the oil in yet. It’s going to blow
up, and you’re going to splatter hot oil
all over your face, right? But the chef probably did
that a bunch of times. That’s how they learned
that those lessons. And now they can break rules
because they understand, well, you can do
this is, [INAUDIBLE] but you can’t do that. But you can break that,
that, that and that, right? So a chef is somebody that
understands those rules to such a level, I can go, boom. And I can weave back and
forth between communicating like a baker or
a cook with them, and I’m confident they won’t
break those fundamental rules I didn’t want them to break. Or my ideal goal, of
course, is to work everyone up to being a chef
to where I can go, sweet, just call me
when you need me, right? With any of these
things, I’m trying to– and this is really a
big part of the book. I’m trying to push people away
from becoming self-dependent and becoming self-reliant. If you have to follow a textbook
or an app to eat every day, you’re becoming
dependent on that, right? That’s not what
we want you to be. We want you to be self-reliant,
where you can go, OK, this is a great starting place. This helped me
learn my body more. This diet that I followed,
and I followed it to a T, I didn’t make any
variations in it. I learned a lot more about
what I react well to, what I don’t react well to. Great. Now I’m going to ditch
the book, ditch the plan, ditch the magic thing and start
changing things on my own. No, I [? understand ?] that
triggered me really fast. Oh, my gosh, now I’m
feeling super tired. I’m nodding off after lunch. OK, it’s because I added this. I can’t do that. I’ve got to make this
combination different, right? And so it should be used to
help you advance not regress you back to, oh, I
don’t have my book. My app crashed. My phone died Oh,
my god, I don’t know what to eat for lunch. That’s what happens, right? And we don’t want
to be at that level. So you don’t want to get
people– when you give people very specific answers,
they become reliant upon those answers. And they don’t become– or they become dependent
upon those answers. They don’t become self-reliant. And that’s really where we’re
trying to get people to get to. Because anyone who’s ever
had a significant change in their health
function or performance is a lifestyle change. And that’s where
we’re always trying to get people to get to, right? If you make them dependent upon
external forces, information, if you make them
be a perma baker, they’re never going
to become a chef. But if you’re always
a cook as well, you’ll never know what to
do to become a chef either. So there’s a little bit of
both we have to go back to. So that’s generally what I do. So when I’m working with an
athlete, in my head I go, OK, all right, Steve,
all right, he’s a baker. I’m filtering
everything through. Bakers do well with a
bunch of instructions, very specific detail. Cooks? Short piece of information,
and they don’t care why, right? So we’ll go back there
again where I’m working with you all as a nutritionist. If I gave you– if I said, hey,
I want you to take 11 walnuts and eat those at 11:00 AM– 11:00, not 12:00. You’d probably go, cool, great. I’m in. Why? You wouldn’t give a shit. Be like, sweet, I’m on
it. [? Let me ?] go, 11. Here we are. We’re done. Cooks don’t care about the why. Bakers tend to
care about the why. So the baker I spend more
time with the buy in. I’m explaining to them
how it’s going to work. Well, it’s because we saw
this in your blood panel. We saw this in
your stool sample. We’re doing this. OK, great. Cooks just want to
know the answers. Great. No question. I’m in. I’m out. Come back in a month. Let me know if it didn’t work. Great. And so it’s just trying to help
them improve communication. And my decade as a teacher
has helped me build that. So although I’m
a hard scientist, I’m a quantitative scientist
by nature, I’m also– I spend a lot of time teaching. And so really I develop that
as a tool with both my students and my athletes as
a way of saying, OK, how can I change my system so
that I can improve for them? I’m not trying to make
all of my athletes chefs or all my students. Some don’t want to be. Some of you might realize, like,
look, nutrition’s not my jam. I want to be healthier. But I’m not going
to dive into it. I’m not going to
start reading stuff. Like, OK, great. I’m not going to try to
make that person a chef. I don’t want you
to work how I work. I want you to work how you work. You tell me how you work. And I will change to help you. That’s my job. When you hire me and pay me
to help you do something, I’m not trying to push
you into my system. I’m trying to change
to fit you and give a system to whatever you want. That’s what I’m
really trying to do. SPEAKER 1: Got it. No, nice. That’s a great
approach to everything. And the more that we can
adapt to our audience, whether it’s in a workplace,
in a nutritional space, then the more impactful the
message will be, right? ANDY GALPIN: That’s the goal. SPEAKER 1: Nice. So at this point, let’s
open up to questions. ANDY GALPIN: Oh, shocking,
she has a question. SPEAKER 1: So here we go. All right, we
practiced this before. So you got this. ANDY GALPIN: Oh, my gosh,
what are we doing here? [INAUDIBLE] That’s
pretty athletic. AUDIENCE: Well, I do work out. ANDY GALPIN: Ah, nice. AUDIENCE: Thanks
very much for coming. And I found the talk
very interesting. One of the things I
think is most interesting is how much you’ve
talked about nutrition and how it’s
extremely subjective. I mean, yes, you can call me
a baker, but for nine years, I was vegetarian. Seven years of
that, I was vegan. And that was kind
of by accident, but it was also
kind of because I was told by a bunch of
friends that it was better for my health. I read some books on it. They all said it
was better for me. And then I developed
hypoglycemia and really bad acid
reflux, which I didn’t know was caused by that. I went back to eating
gradually everything. And 10 years later, still
was hypoglycemic, still having problems with
the acid reflux. So I read the blood
type diet book I’m sure you’re familiar with. And it’s like not
very scientific. But you know, I was
willing to give it a try. I’m a baker. So I followed the recipes
or the instructions. And within two months,
my hypoglycemia was gone. ANDY GALPIN: Awesome. AUDIENCE: Within three
months, acid reflux all gone. And now I don’t
follow it religiously because I’ve actually
graduated to being a chef. I don’t like to brag, but. ANDY GALPIN: It’s totally fine. AUDIENCE: But I did experiment
with all this stuff. And what I’ve told
people, especially people that we know that are
really hardcore vegetarians and vegans, is that
it’s not for everyone. ANDY GALPIN: No. AUDIENCE: And it really
is a personal choice. And it’s not about the yes,
saving the planet is great. And saving the animals is great. And saving the
environment is great. There’s other ways I can
do that are not going to affect how I feel every day. And I was just wondering
what kind of advice do you offer to
people when they’re so attached to a diet, which,
by the way, is from the Greek. It means way of life. They’re so attached to a diet
that actually is hurting them, and they refuse for like
usually moral reasons, like because of the animals,
they won’t let go of it, even though it’s hurting them. ANDY GALPIN: So a
couple of things. Number one, the
vegetarian-vegan argument, you have to tease out
ethics from health, right? Those are separate
conversations. You can’t bleed back and forth. So I’ll leave the moral
ethics stuff aside. It’s not what I do. I can certainly comment on it. It’s not the best use of
our short time here today. The health thing is
the easier approach. As you mentioned, it
would be extremely arrogant and short-sighted
for us to think all 7, 7 and 1/2 billion people
have to eat the same way and that our health would be
optimized eating the same way. It’s undeniable some people do
fantastic on those diets health wise. It’s also undeniable some don’t. It’s pretty silly
also to think you have to eat like that to be healthy. Pick your evidence point,
evolutionary biology, randomized clinical trials. None of it lines up, right? So any of that
[? is a ?] [? win. ?] And it’s overwhelming. It’s just– you can’t
ignore that, or even really ethically debate that, right? You can’t genuinely debate that. It’s just silly. The bigger problem,
I think, that puts into we as humans have
been around for a long time. How could you in a
objective logical mind think we were the generation
that figured it out? Are you kidding? What do you think
the generation– what do you think
someone’s going to do in 10 years from now? No, no, they’re the
ones that figured out. [INAUDIBLE] And so I think if you run
this circle pattern enough, you realize, oh,
what’s the answer here? What’s the common thread
between all of it? There is no single best diet. That’s not going to exist. It never will. There is not a
single best approach. And again, why do
you think you even have to do one approach
your whole life? So why not go vegan,
vegetarian for a year and then go back and
then something else? Why not? Why does it have to be one
answer [? a ?] whole time? Anyone that claims
that a diet like that is the single answer
for an entire generation or an entire
population, maybe they have good intentions
in mind, but it’s not the right approach. It generally
doesn’t help people. So the second part
your question, how do you communicate
with these people that are entrenched, number
one, you can’t. If people aren’t ready to
change, they don’t change. Information always helps. But it has to be
genuine information. So for example, I
could very easily stand up here and
attack those diets from a science perspective. But I don’t do that because
it doesn’t help anything. People that like
vegan-vegetarian are not going to
be excited by that. It’s not going to help anybody. People in the middle
don’t like it. You can get a lot
more views on YouTube. Like, you could cut
a little clip out there like Dr. Galpin, blasts
vegetarian at a Google talk. I’m not interested in that crap. It doesn’t help the movement. What helps is
information, right? And there’s a ton of
information out there. And being genuinely
compassionate and empathetic for those people,
really trying to help them. And when they’re ready,
again, my approach is– so I have worked with
vegetarian-vegan athletes. I have not once
uttered any of them that we should
change their diet. Exception is the
one that has been like, hmm, I want
to do this because I thought it’s healthier. That person, I said, well, why? Why did you think that? Why do you think that? OK, great. And if they have a very good
reason, I’m not against it. I would go there. I will use any tool
that they want. But I will never take a
person that comes to me and says, look, I’m vegan. I want to be vegetarian. But this and this is going on. I want to improve my health,
but I want to stay vegetarian. I would never start
the conversation off about how to get them
away from vegetarian. My goal is to help them succeed
with what they’re doing. So that’s my approach. Once they do that,
they’re probably more likely to understand
you care about them. And then they might start
opening up and being like, well, really, what do
you think about– you think it is healthier this way? And then I’ll give
my honest opinion. But I’m not going to walk
in and start pushing. When I have an athlete
that comes away with keto, my goal is not to push them
away from any of this stuff. I want to help them succeed
with what they want to do. And if [INAUDIBLE] like, where
are you at a scale of 1 to 10 on vegetarian-veganism in terms
of willing to give it up now? I think I’m a nine. Great. I’m not even going to– subconsciously, I’m not going
to hit little jabs at them. I’m not– that’s not
what they came to me for. They came to me
because they want to get better with
what they’re at. Fine. Just like somebody
that came to me with a carnivore diet
or any other crazy diet. That’s what you want to do? Great. OK. Well, I’ll do my best to try
to help you through that. But I’m not going
to try to change you unless you want to change. Then I’ll listen and maybe help. But that’s not my goal. I don’t want everybody eating– I don’t want everyone
believing my philosophies. I’ll try to help you as I can. But that doesn’t help anyone. AUDIENCE: Yeah. So you said there’s no
single solution for things. But also, want I have
like [? knee ?] condition or [? dental ?] condition. I realize that there is no– even the experts
say different things about how to treat
my conditions. And so you’ve been working with
the best people in that area. So can you give us a tip on
how to find a good doctor or nutritionist or [INAUDIBLE]? ANDY GALPIN: Yeah. That’s such a good question. I get that probably more than
anything else when I do media or in a classroom. It’s something that I wish I
had perfectly solved myself, but I don’t. You can look for
red flags, though. If anybody is selling a product
directly behind themselves, it’s not biased. It’s not guaranteed wrong. But if the answer to
every single person that walks in their
clinic is, oh, yeah, you’ve got to take
this thing, then you’ll start to be
like, hm, weird. The other ones you want
to pay attention to are the ones that are treating
symptom not problem, right? You want to find the ones
that address a problem. And the last piece
I’ll say to that is you want to find people that are
treating the entire system not the knee. Because the knee is a symptom. That’s the signal. But that may not be the
cause of the problem. I don’t know what
your knee issue is. But it might be something that– it might be because
of your neck. It might be because of
your right shoulder. And so you want to find
a physician that asks questions about everything. They’ll sit you down and go,
OK, you’re having knee problems. Tell me about the knee problem. OK, great. Well, let me see you walk. OK, let’s take this other thing. Well, tell me about your diet. Tell me when do you
feel most symptoms? When are you feeling a flare up? What activities [INAUDIBLE]? OK, great. Well, let’s look
at your posture. Let’s look at how you move. How do you sleep? What’s your desk look like? What’s your car ride? Are you commuting a lot
[? or no commute? ?] OK, what’s your stress? How much are you sleeping? That’s somebody who
will fix your problem. So those are the
people I look for. If you’re going to a physician
or a physical therapist and they go, OK, what’s
your knee problem? Oh, the back of my knee hurts
when I stand up too much. OK, great. Do three sets of 10 of this. Like, walk out. Gone. Like, they’re not
fixing anything. Or if they’re just
were like, OK, great, start on these
anti-inflammatories, and we’ll see what happens. Not going to work, man,
like not going to work. So keep walking out
of those offices until you find somebody that
really treats the symptom. And it’s really hard. Of course, I can give you
personal referrals to people. But I don’t want to sound
like I’m plugging anybody specifically. But there’s tons of
people that do this. You can look up– I didn’t want to say this,
but I’ll just say it. You can look up
functional medicine. Now, some functional
medicine practitioners are complete quacks. But a lot of them
tend to be decent. And that’s a good start because
they tend to treat the body. It’s a really bad
buzz term right now. Be very careful with it. There’s a lot of hot and cold on
functional medicine right now. There’s some bad stuff
going on with that as well. But some of that, they at least
are pushing the concept forward of treating the system. I think one of the biggest
[? disservices ?] we’ve ever done in the field of
health and fitness is teaching people
different body systems. You’re in the muscle system. And you learn the bone system. You learn the nervous system. Because that’s not
how that works. And it makes people
think siloed. Oh, I have a bone problem. Therefore, fix the bone. Well, it might be a nerve issue. It might be a gut issue. It might be the fact that
you don’t sleep well. Turns out when you sleep well,
all these things go away. The body works in systems. We have multiple things, right? So when you fix those
big hanging fruit, everything tends to
start to line up. So I would go to a
physician or a therapist or whoever you’re
looking for that asks all the questions about
the lifestyle habits, and that fixes your problem. So long answer, but
that’s my real answer. AUDIENCE: Thanks. ANDY GALPIN: Oh,
so close, minus 10. AUDIENCE: So you talk a lot
about like finding a balance within the choices you
make and making sure that you understand the
consequence of the things you do. I’m curious to understand
how do you approach something like weight cutting, something
that like UFC fighters have to do, like they just
have to make a certain weight? ANDY GALPIN: I’ll give
you a global answer. And then maybe you can follow
up with the specific thing because I’m not sure
exactly what you’re asking. And so we you can
do a follow up here. But it’s like anything else. During that extreme
weight cut, and we’ve been part of some
very extreme ones. You’re talking people– the
biggest one I’ve ever been, even just peripherally
a part of, we’re going to have go from
252 pounds down to 185 pounds. SPEAKER 1: Really? ANDY GALPIN: Probably had 12
weeks for that or something. I’ve seen people go within,
let’s say, on a Tuesday, weigh-ins are usually
Friday, go from 178 to 155. I’ve seen 20 pounds cut
in 24 hours or less. Of course, that’s almost
exclusively water, right? So the only way I manage that is
you go through those periods– and I can tell a
story about this. I worked with an athlete
who won a gold medal in Rio, the Olympics. And about four months
out or three months out, the weight just
stopped coming off. And that’s because she had
been in a state of low calorie for 9, 10, 12 months. And we had to match that
optimization with adaptation. So what we did
actually is we gave her a boatload of carbohydrate,
way up on calories, almost all from vegetable. And weight just
started flowing off. It started coming off, because
she had been so low calorie. And with generally
with low calorie, you get low nutrient because
you just don’t have quantity. We had to go the other way. So it was like, let’s make the
body feel better for a minute. Let’s give you a couple of
weeks of feeling better. And as soon as it did that, it
kind of relaxed, if you will. And then the fat
started falling off. And she got down, made weight,
no problem, won a gold medal. She became the first
American actually female ever to win gold medal in wrestling. So this is a huge thing. She upset 16-times
straight world champion. [INAUDIBLE] So you have to match
it the same way. So when my athletes
come, I literally had a conversation this
morning with one of mine, when you come off
that hard cut thing, we have to match it
with let’s restore. Let’s recover. Let’s not balloon
up to 250 again. But let’s match it there. So that’s– but I’m not
sure what you’re asking. Go ahead and follow up now. AUDIENCE: That was
basically what I was asking. But could you speak more
specific to like how do you– like after an event, after
they start to recover, how do you do it
in a way that’s– ANDY GALPIN: Yeah. So one key, I had someone one
time after a pretty big weight cut, won a very big competition. She was extremely
excited and had been on a very, very
clean diet for months. And then she sent me a picture. She was on one of those
daytime talk shows or something, one of the
big news things afterwards. She sent me a picture. Like, they brought me in
and pizza and chocolate and other stuff. And I’m like, do not eat that. I’m like, yes, it’s reward time. But you’re going to blow up. Like this is not–
and of course, she ate it and very
much regretted it. We’ll put it that way, if
you get what I’m saying. Not what you want to be feeling
when you’re on national TV. Well, my point is it’s just
going back to the same thing. We just started
increasing calories. But you can’t just
go off the rails. I made this mistake one
time after a personal weight cut of my own. And I went to a place that
serves wings and beer. I was like, I have one beer
and a bunch of wings and fries. Oh, my gosh, the worst, right? You feel awful. And so you bring in calories. And you can have a
little bit of a treat. But you have to work yourself
back into that stuff as well. And does [? the very detail? ?]
It’s the same food. You just eat a little more. It’s more vegetable, more fresh
fruit, maybe a little bit more fat, if you want. But you’re eating
real whole foods. Once you do that
for a little bit, then you can actually
have the luxury to eat ice cream or cake or
whatever little indulgence– wine. Like, hers was wine. OK, fine. But you can’t just
go off the rails and just go back from
really fresh, clean foods for nine months to garbage. You’re going to get destroyed. So that’s really what we do. It’s the same way
when we come back up. And you have to be careful,
though because about two months later, it was
like, yes, so remember how you said I can have a
little bit of chocolate now? Yeah, I’m pretty much eating
chocolate everyday all day. All right, time to
tighten back down, like come back the other way. So It’s just balancing
those two things. SPEAKER 1: You guys
have any more questions? Perfect. Well, Dr. Galpin, it’s a
pleasure and a privilege. Thanks so much for stopping by. And, yeah, you guys
check out his book. It’s “Unplugged.” A few more copies right up here. And, yeah, feel
free to hang around. Let’s go get some steak
because it’s steak day. So let’s party. ANDY GALPIN: Perfect. Thanks for having me. [APPLAUSE]