One of the more common questions is whether I recommend any supplements. I recommend very few of them. For longer fasts, I recommend a general multivitamin, although there is scant evidence that it is beneficial. In fact, almost all vitamin supplements have been proven to be useless. In some cases, like vitamin B, worse than useless. All vitamins go through periods of of popularity and unpopularity. It’s worse than high school. One minute, you’re the most popular kid in class, then next you’re the laughingstock.

In the 1960’s the king of vitamins was vitamin C. Linus Pauling is the only person to have won two unshared Nobel Prizes — once for chemistry and once for peace. He had the firm unshakeable belief that many of the problems of modern nutrition could be cured by mega doses of vitamin C. He suggested that high dose vitamin C could prevent or cure the common cold, the flu and even cancer. He even suggested that “75% of all cancer can be prevented and cured by vitamin C alone”. That, of course is wildly optimistic. Many studies were done over the next few decades that clearly proved that most of these vitamin C claims were simply false hopes. Turns out the only disease Vitamin C cures is scurvy. Since I don’t treat many 15th century pirates, it’s not too useful for me.

Once vitamin C supplementation was proven largely useless to prevent disease, the next great hope was vitamin E. Its main claim to glory was as an ‘antioxidant’. Supposedly, vitamin E would neutralize all the nasty free radicals that were causing untold damage to our vascular system. Taking vitamin E would prevent heart disease, we were told. Except, of course, it did nothing of the sort. The HOPE trial, best remembered now as one of the trials to establish the use of the ACEI class of medication in cardiovascular protection. However, this randomized controlled trial also tested whether vitamin E could prevent disease. Unfortunately, the answer was no. Vitamin E supplements did not prevent heart disease or stroke. Indeed, more patients in the vitamin group died, had heart attacks and strokes although this was not statistically significant. Vitamin C was a bust, and so was vitamin E. But the list of shame would not stop there.

The next great hope was vitamin B. In the early 2000s, there was a great flurry of interest in a blood test called homocysteine. High homocysteine levels were correlated with increased risk of heart disease. Vitamin B could lower homocysteine levels, but whether this would translate into better health outcomes was unknown. Several large scale trials were launched with this hope. One of these was the NORVIT trial, published in 2006 in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine.

The news was stunning. Stunningly bad, that is. Compared to taking placebo (sugar pills), supplementation with folate, vitamin B6 and B12 was giving people more heart attacks and strokes. Yes. The vitamin group was not doing better, it was doing worse. But worse news was still to come, if you can believe it. In 2009, researchers studied the two randomized controlled trials of vitamin B supplementation and found that in addition to raising the risk of cardiovascular disease, the risk of cancer was increased by 21%! Aw snap! The risk of dying from cancer increased by 38%. Taking useless vitamins is one thing, taking vitamins that are actively harmful is something else.

The use of vitamin B supplements for kidney disease was similarly dismal. The DIVINe study randomized two groups of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) to either placebo or vitamin B supplements with the hope of slowing down the progression of kidney disease. Homocysteine levels are high in CKD and the vitamins were able to lower these levels. But did they make any real difference? Sure did. The use of vitamin B made things worse. Much, much worse. It doubled the incidence of poor outcomes. Another nail in the coffin of the homocysteine story and vitamin B supplements. Another 10 years of research money wasted.

The ironic part of this flawed knowledge is that we are still paying the price. Enriched wheat flour, for example is wheat with all the goodness extracted and then certain vitamins replaced. So almost all the vitamins were removed, and replaced with huge doses of iron and vitamin B. So what we got was a huge surplus of vitamin B. Not that I believe this was malicious. People were mostly concerned about nutrient deficiencies like beri beri, iron deficiency anemia and not so much with anything else. The problem, of course, is that we now have data that show that giving large doses of vitamin B may increase rates of cancer and hear attacks.

But why should vitamin B supplements be bad? After all, folate supplements have reduced the incidence of neural tube defects in pregnancy significantly. Like everything else in medicine, it’s a question of context. Vitamin B is needed for growth of cells. During growth periods, like pregnancy and childhood, this is a good thing.

The problem is completely different during adulthood. Excessive growth is NOT good. The fastest growing cells are cancer cells, so they love, love, love the extra vitamin B. Not so good for us people. Even for regular cells, the excessive growth is not good, because it leads to scarring and fibrosis. This explains how you get more heart attacks, strokes and kidney disease. Cardiovascular disease is caused by atherosclerosis, the hardening of the arteries and excessive fibrosis likely makes it worse.

Calcium supplements, of course have been recommended by doctors for decades as a preventative strategy against osteoporosis. I explained everything in this lecture from a few years ago “The Calcium Story”. Almost every doctor has recommended calcium supplements to prevent osteoporosis.

Why? The rationale is that bones have lots of calcium so eating calcium must make bones stronger. This is, of course, the reasoning that a third grader might use, but that’s besides the point. Eating brains makes us smarter. Eating kidneys improves kidney function. Right…. But any who, this puerile reasoning lasted for about 50 years.

We pretend that we live in a world of evidence based medicine. Just as we discussed with calories, it seems that evidence is not needed for the status quo, but only for ‘alternative viewpoints’. They finally did a proper randomized controlled trial on calcium supplementation and published it in 2006. The Women’s Health Initiative randomized over 36,000 women to calcium and vitamin D or placebo. Then they followed them for over 7 years and monitored them for hip fractures. Did taking calcium every day for 7 years give women super-strong bones that never crack?

Hardly. There was no difference in total fractures, hip, vertebral or wrist fractures. In other words, calcium supplements were completely useless. Actually, that’s not true. There was a significant difference. Those people taking calcium had significantly more kidney stones. So, they were actually harmed by taking these pills. Nice. Are these women glad they faithfully took their pills every day for the last 7 years?

What is the reason why these supplements are not beneficial and mostly harmful? It’s really quite simple. You must understand the root cause (the aetiology) of disease in order to prescribe rational treatment. The diseases that we face today — obesity, type 2 diabetes, osteoporosis, cancer, heart disease etc. ARE NOT VITAMIN DEFICIENCY DISEASES. If these are not disease caused by a lack of vitamins, why would we expect supplementation to make a difference?

Let’s take an analogy. Suppose our car does not run because the engine has exploded. Somebody then says “Oh, hey, I had a time where our car did not run because it was out of gas. Therefore you should put more gas into the car”. But it doesn’t work. Because you must treat the root cause. The problem was that the engine exploded. I don’t really care how much gas is in the car in this situation.

So, if we are treating vitamin deficiency disease (scurvy, beri beri, osteomalacia) then replacing vitamins is very logical and effective. If we are treating obesity, then replacing vitamins is completely and utterly useless. I don’t worry about nutrient density of foods, because I am not treating a nutrient deficiency disease. However, people love trying to sell you the latest greatest weight loss supplement (green coffee, raspberry ketones, PGX, fibre, Sensa etc).

If you are asking the question “What can I eat/ take/ supplement to help me lose weight?” then you are completely going in the wrong direction. The question you need to ask is “What can i NOT eat/take/ supplement to help me lose weight?” The money to be made answering the latter question is orders of magnitude smaller than trying to answer the first.



Why Antioxidants, Vitamins, and Hormones failed to reverse agingThey treat the symptoms and not the causes

“Although many drivers of human aging can be slowed or delayed, many of these factors are thought to be non-reversible reversible. (Ex: DNA gene mutations are not reversible).

Most “anti-aging” supplements like anti-oxidants cannot reverse such aspects of aging.  Instead, they merely “control damage,” and many have a mixed track record of efficacy in clinical trials.

Likewise, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) does not reverse aging, despite the claims of some “anti-aging” clinics. In fact, emerging scientific studies have shown that exogenous anti-oxidant supplements and HRTs have a paradoxical effect.

For instance, exercise has been shown to increase the expression of anti-oxidant genes and increase the expression of endogenous hormones (hGH, etc.). However, when exogenous anti-oxidants are used, this reduces the expression of anti-oxidant genes induced by the exercise producing a negative effect.

Likewise, exogenous HRT use suppresses endogenous hormone production and thereby accelerates the decline in hormone gene expression that occurs with aging (via an epigenetic feedback-this is so good inhibition mechanism).

This is why many testosterone users have testicular atrophy. Thus antioxidants and HRTs treat the symptoms (i.e. “downstream effects) of aging, rather than the cause (“upstream events”) of aging.

Current initiatives to restore NAD+ levels in individuals are attempts to affect what we believe are “upstream events” in aging to produce positive downstream events, such as already has been shown to be possible in various studies – like reversal of muscle aging in rodents.

Because nuclear NAD+ deficiency has so many impacts that mimic those of caloric restriction (CR), we look next at how it affects upstream events in molecular aging.  We are also looking at CR for ideas for the best biomarkers for objectively evaluating the “upstream effects” of restoring NAD+ levels in the nucleus.”

Combating ROS with supplements derived from “healthy” fruits and vegetables that were found to possess Anti-oxidant properties in vitro was all the rage over the last 15 years or so, but has been falling out of favor as research shows that many of these supplements fail to reach individual cells in sufficient concentration to make a positive impact in vivo.

The attempts to attenuate aging processes including the increase in organismal longevity by antioxidants were largely unsuccessful (r)

“In the absence of malnutrition, there is little or no reason to take antioxidant supplements because the ability of these compounds to function as antioxidants is largely determined by the [NADP+]/[NADPH]”

That is why more and more researchers say Anti-oxidants don’t work, as Dr Sinclair explains in this video.

Carrageenan may be BAD for your health

Is Carrageenan Bad For You Gene Bruno

Carrageenan, an extract of red seaweed, is a good source of soluble fiber. It is widely used in the food industry, for its gelling, thickening, and stabilizing properties.

Carrageenan is a vegetarian and vegan alternative to gelatin in some applications. It has also been the subject of many long-term dietary studies under defined regulatory conditions en route to its current global regulatory status.

While some indicate that carrageenan safely passes through rat GI tracts without adverse effect when it is a dietary ingredient, other animal dietary studies have observed colitis-like disease and tumor promotion. This has caused some people to be concerned about the safety of carrageenan when used in dietary supplements.

The question of safety
So what is the bottom line? Is carrageenan a safe or unsafe dietary ingredient for humans? To answer this question, it is important to consider the amount of carrageenan used in animal studies. In a published scientific review called, “Review of Harmful Gastrointestinal Effects of Carrageenan in Animal Experiments,”1 the author discusses a variety of studies.

When examining those in which the animals consumed carrageenan in water or food, negative effects were observed at levels of 0.2 to 15 grams per kilogram of body weight. That would translate to 15 to 1,125 grams of carrageenan daily for a 165 pound human being. At the high end of that range, that’s the equivalent of eating 4500 calories a day just from carrageenan alone.

My point is, the amounts used in these studies are typically far more than people would likely consume on a daily basis in dietary supplements; and speaking of people, it is important to note that the concerns about the use of carrageenan are based solely upon animal studies, not human studies. Nevertheless, there are human studies on carrageenan, and the results are different than those of the animal studies.

Human studies on carrageenan
In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study,2 255 patients with peptic ulcers received 0.75 g of carrageenan or a placebo each day for 22 months.

The results were that, compared to placebo, carrageenan was effective for the treatment of peptic ulcer without noticeable side effects (p<0.025). The global judgment of effectiveness was made based chiefly on the x-ray and gastroscopic findings, and then on the outcome of such subjective symptoms as retching, vomiting, nausea, and anorexia.

Another randomized crossover study3 aimed to determine the effect of carrageenan incorporation into a meal on carbohydrate absorption in human subjects.

The concept being that soluble fiber decreases the amount of carbohydrates that reach the bloodstream by delaying their absorption in the small intestine. This was tested by measuring blood glucose levels, a reflection of carbohydrate absorption.

The total dietary fiber (TDF) content of the carrageenan (2.03 percent) meal was about three times that of the control meal (0.68 percent). The meal provided 14.84g (meal with carrageenan) and 3.45 g of TDF (meal without carrageenan), and were fed to the same ten fasting subjects at different times.

The results showed the average blood glucose levels of subjects were significantly lower after consuming the carrageenan meal than when consuming the regular meal (P <or = 0.05 at 15, 45, and 90 minutes). Likewise, there was a significant lowering of total cholesterol (P <0.0014) and triglyceride (P <0.0006) levels after eight weeks with carrageenan. In fact, levels of HDL cholesterol (the “good cholesterol”) increased significantly (P <0.0071) after eight weeks with carrageenan.

No side effects were reported in the study. The researchers concluded that the blood sugar lowering-effects of carrageenan could prove useful in the prevention and management of metabolic conditions such as diabetes.

There are also some human cell line studies, but I didn’t include data on those because they don’t necessarily reflect what happens in a live human body.

In my opinion, at the doses typically found in dietary supplements, carrageenan is neither potentially beneficial nor potentially harmful—there is just too little of it. Personally, I would not hesitate to use dietary supplements that contain carrageenan as part of their make-up.


  1. Tobacman JK. Review of harmful gastrointestinal effects of carrageenan in animal experiments. Environ Health Perspect. Oct 2001;109(10): 983–94.
  2. Yamagata S, Ishimori A, Hachiro S, et al. Clinical Evaluation of Pharmacotherapy for Peptic Ulcer with Antipepsin Agents by Double Blind Technique – Multicenter Clinical Study. Tohoku J Exp Med. 1973;110:377–404.
  3. Dumelod BD, Ramirez RP, Tiangson CL, Barrios EB, Panlasigui LN. Carbohydrate availability of arroz caldo with lambda-carrageenan. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 1999 Jul;50(4):283–9.

Lactobacillus Gasseri – the Weight Loss Probiotic?

There are millions of bacteria that inhabit our guts.  Most are beneficial, and are referred to as Probiotics.

A healthy and diverse population of these good bacteria are key to proper functioning of our digestive and immune systems, greatly impacting our physical and mental health. (1234).

We can improve the population of good bacteria in our guts thru proper nutrition, and by taking Probiotic supplements.

Research has shown this can relieve many chronic health problems.  While not as strong as Garcinia Cambogia, some Probiotics may also help us lose weight and belly fat.

Probiotic Strains that may help lose weight and belly fat

650x600_lactobacillus_finalStudies have found that certain strains of the Lactobacillus family can help you lose weight and belly fat.

In one study, eating yogurt with Lactobacillus fermentum or Lactobacillus amylovorus reduced body fat by 3–4% over a 6-week period (21).

Another study of 125 overweight dieters investigated the effects of Lactobacillus rhamnosus supplements on weight loss and weight maintenance (22).

During a 3-month study period, the women taking the probiotics lost 50% more weight compared to the group taking a dummy pill (placebo). They also continued to lose weight during the weight maintenance phase of the study.

Note that in these 2 studies mentioned above subjects were provided with Prebiotics along with the LG (Yoghurt and Inulin) which is thought to improve the effectiveness.

Lactobacillus Gasseri

Lactobacillus gasseri is generating the most excitement and further research for its  effects on weight loss.

There have been several mouse studies that showed positive results for weight control (25262728).

Human studies are also promising.  Most recently,  a 2 week study of 30 healthy men in 2015.

Subject were given a glass of fermented milk to drink every day, with half including Lactobacillus gasseri in their drink and the other half not.

Testing of fecal samples before and after the study showed those receiving Lactobacillus gasser had a higher amount of fat in the feces after the 2 weeks, while the control group did not (29).

lactobacillus gasseri and weight loss

Effect of intake of fermented milk containing Lactobacillus gasseri on fecal fat excretion in humans.

This proved that not only does the Lactobacillus gasseri survive the digestive process, but that it had an effect on the metabolism, resulting in less fat being absorbed.

This study demonstrates the mechanism for how Lactobacillus gasseri can effect the system.

An earlier Japanese study showed Lactobacillus gasseri can effectively reduce waist size, BMI and the dangerous visceral fat that accumulates around the organs (30).

A Korean company has patented a form of LG derived from mothers milk they call Lactobacillus gasseri BNR17, and been granted a certificate of Functional Ingredient for Body Fat reduction  (31)

Some strains of the Lactobacillus family have been shown to reduce weight and belly fat. Lactobacillus gasseri appears to be the most effective.

Natural Food Sources of Lactobacillus Gasseri

probiotic foodsLactobacillus bacteria is the most commonly used for fermentation.

Most fermented foods naturally contain Lactobacillus gasseri bacteria.

Kombucha, Kefir, yoghurt and pickled vegetables like kimchi, sauerkraut are good sources of a wide variety of Lactobacillus strains.

Some fermented meats like salami and chorizo also contain lactobacillus bacteria.

You can also ferment foods yourself at home, but be sure to do it properly. I recommend starting with these recipes for kefir, kimchi or sauerkraut.

Lactobacillus gasseri is also found naturally in breast milk, which is thought to help the development of an infant’s immune system.

Where to buy Lactobacillus Gasseri

amazon cartLactobacillus Gasseri is the most effective probiotic strain for weight loss identified so far.

There are several brands on Amazon that include some L Gasseri in combination with 10 or more other strains.

These are the only 2 we have been able to find that primarily use L Gasseri.

Swanson  – A single strain – Lactobacillus Gasseri –  3 billion CFUs.

Phillips Colon Health  – 3 different strains including Lactobacillus Gasseri –  1.5 billion CFUs.

What Are Probiotics?

Probiotics are bacteria (biotic)  we eat that are beneficial (pro) to our bodies.

We humans carry around 10 times as many microorganisms with us as we have cells in our body.  (5).

what are probiotics
They are most prominent in  the stomach and intestinal tract where they aid nutrient absorption and  immune system and are referred to as our gut flora or gut microbiome.

There are hundreds  of strains   of these friendly bacteria that aid digestion and produce important nutrients, including B and K vitamins.

Antibiotics we sometimes use can  kill or inhibit the growth of the “good”  bacteria in our gut as well as the the “bad” bacteria which can seriously impact our health (6).

By adding more probiotic foods into your diet, you could reap the following health benefits:

  • Stronger immune system
  • Healing leaky gut syndrome and IBS
  • Improved digestion
  • Increased energy
  • Weight loss
  • Healthier skin

 Damage to our Digestive Systems

Probiotics-vs-Antibiotics-1Modern agricultural practices including  rampant use of pesticides, chlorine soaking,  preservatives and refrigeration   leave our foods have very little probiotics today.

In fact, some foods now have dangerous antibiotics that destroy the bacteria in our digestive system.

In addition to the problems with our foods, we also encounter many toxins in our environment that harm our digestive system, resulting in chronic inflammation that is the root cause of many diseases and chronic health issues
Damaged from:

  • Antibiotics
  • Processed Grains
  • Sugar
  • Emotional Stress
  • Chemicals and medications

Too many of us are subjected  to many of these everyday.  If they’re not addressed, the population of good bacteria is decimated  and you gut can become a breeding ground for bad bacteria, parasites, yeast and fungi.

Our foods, environment, stresses and medicines can all damage the biology in our guts and wreak havoc on our health.

How does Gut Bacteria affect weight

woman-eating-yogurt-with-berries-flaxThe biology of our guts is not static, and can be changed by diet and outside environmental factors(12).

Bacteroidetes and firmicutes are the 2 main families of bacteria that are important for regulating bodyweight by digesting  fatty acids and dietary polysaccharides.

Imbalance of these ratios (gut dysbiosis)  affect weight loss or gain.
The functions of the hundreds of different strains of bacteria are complex and not entirely understood, with some disagreement among researchers (78).

Some bacteria help digest  fiber into beneficial fatty acids  butyrate (9).

Prevotella  is a enterotype, or  family of bacteria strain that help digest carbohydrates and are more prevalent in people who consume a lot of carbohydrates.

Bacteroides are another family of bacteria that is more prevalent in people who consume significant amounts of animal protein.

Increasing the population of certain strains of bacteria is now thought to effect how our bodies process and store food, which can affect weight.

weight-loss-research-scientists-mouseAn early sign of this was a study where gut bacteria from obese mice that are transplanted into the guts of normal weight mice result in those mice soon becoming obese (13).

Minimising low-grade inflammation, one of the main drivers behind metabolic disease, is the primary suspect (141516).

In people, studies show that those who are overweight  have much different populations of bacteria  than people of normal weight (1718).

This lead to further studies to see which strains of bacteria were different.

Those studies show normal weight people have more bacteroidetes, and fewer firmicutes than overweight people. (1920).

Several studies have demonstrated regular use can increase number and diversity of bacteria microbiota, and provide relief from colitis, diarrhea, and improve immune system response (32,33,34,35,36,37)

These results opened up some very exciting possibilities for weight loss to see how much we can alter our gut bacteria to help cure obesity.

There is wide variation in the population of bacteria in each persons gut. Research shows it is influenced by out diet, and these bacteria play a powerful role in controlling weight

Final Thoughts

Besides weight loss, a healthy microbiome can have improve digestive health, reduce inflammation, improve cardiovascular risk factors and even help fight depression and anxiety.

Proper diet is the best way to improve your gut flora.

Probiotic Supplements can also increase the number and diversity of your gut flora.

Research indicates probiotics can help some people lose belly fat and weight.

The effects are minor though, along the lines of what you might expect from using Cumin
or Niagen.

On the plus side though, Probiotics do not have the side effects
of strong diet supplements.

As always, we recommend a low carb diet and more exercise as the most effective way to lose weight.

Is Green Tea an effective diet aid ?

Girl-Drinking-Tea-WebGreen tea is one of the healthiest drinks known to man.

It is jam-packed with  antioxidants that have been proven to be  beneficial to the body in preventing skin damage, improving brain function, lower risk of cancer, type 2 diabetes and more (1,2,3,4)

The benefits of green tea are not dependent on drinking it in tea. It is just as effective in extract form.

In fact, if you read the label of any fat burning product (5,6,7) and their is a high probability that it includes some Green Tea Extract.

Substances in Green Tea help boost metabolism

Boost-MetabolismTheir are several bioactive substances from the leaves of green tea that have been shown in research studies to have some small beneficial effect on weight loss for obese individuals (8,9)

When you drink the tea, these substances are readily absorbed by you body (10).

The most well-known of these substances is caffeine. A single serving of green tea only has about 40 mg of caffeine, whereas the same amount of coffee holds well over 100 mg.

However, it is still enough to have a slight effect on your system.

Caffeine is well-known to be effective in fat burning, and studies have shown it to enhance performance in physical exercise (1112).

Caffeine is not the only star of green tea. It  is full of catechins, a potent antioxidant (13). The most important catechin is Epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), which is a powerful substance that aids in boosting metabolism (14).

Green tea contains bioactive substances such as caffeine and EGCG,  which have many beneficial effects including boosting metabolism

Helps Cells Release Fat

brain to fat cellsTo burn body fat, it must first be broken down within the cell and then moved into the bloodstream.

Green tea’s active compounds aid this process by enhancing the effects of fat-burning hormones within the body.

For instance, the antioxidant EGCG helps by inhibiting the enzyme that breaks down norepinephrine (15).

When this occurs, norepinephrine increases (16). The nervous system reacts to this hormone increase by signaling the fat cells to break down their fat reserves.

On top of this, the naturally occurring EGCG and caffeine in green tea may have a synergistic effect as caffeine enhances steps along the same signal path (17).

This results in the cells breaking down and releasing more fat into the bloodstream, where it is then used by the body as energy.

The healthy substances found in green tea increase the hormones that signal the body to break down fat in its cells, where it is released to become energy.

Targets harmful Visceral Fat

visceral-fatGreen tea has only a modest effect on total pounds lost. Two studies reviewing controlled trials of weight loss with green tea show an average of three pounds per person, on average (1819).

However, it is important to note that all types of fat are not the same.

Subcutaneous fat is fat which is stored under the skin.

Visceral fat is the much more dangerous abdominal fat that builds up around the organs.

It is this visceral fat that causes insulin resistance and inflammation, which are two leading causes of many serious conditions, including diabetes, metabolic syndrome and heart disease (20).

While the weight loss effects of green tea may be humble, the good news is that a notable portion of the fat that is lost is that dangerous visceral fat around our midsections (212223).

The unhealthy visceral fat around the midsection is reduced most with use of Green Tea

Burns Fat much more effectively when combined with Exercise

exercise cartoon
In one particular study on the subject, some men took green tea extract while others did not.

Both groups exercised, but those who were given the extract burned a whopping 17% more fat than those who did not (24).

Another study performed over an 8-week period showed that green tea was not only an effective fat burner during exercise, but at rest as well (25).

Several other studies have backed this claim. It seems that green tea promotes fat burning in general, which can lead to reduced fat stores over time (2627).

Numerous studies have shown the efficacy of green tea in burning fat in the body, and this effect is further increased when exercise is included.

Boosts Metabolism and Helps Burn Calories 24/7

Studies show that green tea increases the body’s ability to burn calories even when it is at rest. This is generally around 3-4%, however, may rise as high as 8% in some cases (282930).

These studies were short, but there is evidence outside of them to suggest the metabolism-boosting effects occur over the long-term (3132).

In one such study, 60 obese individuals were tracked over a period of three months. Half of the participants were given green tea extract, the rest placebo.

Those receiving Green Tea Extract lost on average 7.3 more pounds and after the three months were burning 183 more calories a day than those who received placebo. (33).

Not all studies show such positive results from Green Tea. It seems to be highly dependent on the individual.(34).

Studies have shown the metabolism-boosting effects of green tea, which can increase caloric burn 3-4% a day.

Final thoughts

Green tea provides a slight increase in fat burning and metabolism.

Although it doesn’t seem to be as effective as Garcinia Cambogia, it does help target the worst belly fat, and when combined with other weight loss strategies like low carbohydrate diets, eating more protein, and getting more exercise it is very effective.

Green tea is good for you in other ways beyond just losing weight. Read more about the benefits of Green Tea here.

Many of these same health benefits are being proven for the recently discovered Anti-Aging Vitamin Nicotinamide Riboside.