This site uses cookies to:
  • Allow members to log in to the site;
  • Collect anonymous data for Google Analytics, so that we know which parts of the site are the most interesting;
  • To prevent this message from annoying you if you've already dismissed it;
By using the site, you are agreeing to the use of these cookies. If you have cookies disabled, some parts of the site may not work as expected.

Dismiss this message

Matt Lovell Interview – Part 2

Matt Lovell Interview – Part 2

Yesterday I shared a Matt Lovell interview. Matt is a nutritionist who can list the England Rugby Union team, Tottenham Hotspur Football Club, Manchester City Football Club and UK Athletics among his clients.

Matt Lovell interview

He was generous with his time and gave me so much during the interview that I have had to split it into two parts! Part 1 of the Matt Lovell interview can be found here.

On to the part 2 of the interview, where we discuss nutritional education within fitness, the supplement business generally, steroid use amongst the fitness elite etc.…

HF: With the rise in the ‘celeb’ nutritionist such as yourself, Ben Coomber, Alex Ferentinos etc, how can you all work closer with the fitness educators to improve the quality of nutrition teaching in fitness education?

The nutrition info taught on a Level 2/3 Personal Trainer course is vastly different to what you’d learn in a seminar with any of you guys.

ML: That’s a really good question! The thing is with nutrition, because individuals are so different, two different philosophies can still achieve great results, for example you can still lose fat on a high carb, low fat diet – that has been proven to be the case. You can also lose fat on a low carb, high fat diet, and that has been proven to be the case also, so both work as long as you adhere to basic principles such as energy balance.

There are fundamental things that we can’t stray away from that are ultimately governed by the laws of physics.

BUT, there has to be a more streamlined approach in terms of unifying peoples answers and I think the danger is when you get into a way of thinking, you tend to think that’s the only way of getting results.

So you tend to have all the high carbs guys and often they’re academics and they’ll be putting out loads of papers on endurance stuff and then you’ve got Tim Noakes, who used to be high carbs but is all about low carbs.

Personally I think that low carb is the answer for the diabetic and obesity epidemic in the general population. I think sugar is a problem, almost certainly. But I don’t think we can be that different in philosophy really, as along as we all keep a good base in science.

But then on the flip side you’ve got people who only do stuff based on scientific studies and in doing that you miss the applied side of the science – how your advice actually translates with real people.

HF: In 2009 I listened to Charles Poliquin lecture on the benefits of low carb diets. He’s been attacked by some in the industry for hand-picking studies that back up his approach. Likewise with the high carb guys.

Could there be a council on which nutritionists from all sides sit and put together a series of guidelines for sound nutritional practice for the general population, similar to the World Health Organisation (WHO)?

ML: The problem with that though is this – if your entire system is built to sell supplements, then immediately you’ve got to question the ethics.

When it comes to an approach such as biosignature (Charles Poliquin), it’s supplement heavy. I’m not saying some of the protocols don’t work, because they probably do and there is hormonal associations with body fat distribution, that’s been proven in science. But whether you can tell that with a pair of callipers probably remains to be seen.

I did the Poliquin course in 2008 and he did say he was involved in multi-centre national studies but I haven’t seen any of that data published. But look, cortisol and insulin in excess with a calorie surplus does cause a central fat definition and if you pump someone full of synthetic testosterone, then tricep skin fold does go down. There are studies that show this.

HF: I suppose it comes down to are they promoting health or aesthetics? When corners of the industry hold up bodybuilders as their definition of health, to those of us in the industry we know that when these guys reach stage weight, from a health perspective they’re a bit of a disaster.

Yeah, and steroids are a whole other thing. We know they are in the industry and you can clearly see people who are obviously taking gear, although I’d never point any fingers.

There’s a steroid look and a non-steroid look and you can see who’s on them and who’s not.

HF: The difficulty is some of these people have a huge Facebook and social media following and their message is wide reaching.

Luckily for them most people outside of the industry have an untrained eye and may think many of these guys are an example of what is achievable naturally.

ML: I’ve got no issues with it really, as long as they don’t put their clients on gear or sell programmes and plans, suggesting if you follow it you can look the same as them. That’s when it’s unfair.

HF: With regards to supplements, as a professional nutritionist you’re going to have to swim against the tide of Flex magazine and the typical ‘bro’ advice such as ‘ you need 5g of protein per lb of body weight’. 

How do avoid being cynically accused of pushing the importance of protein and BCAA’s because you have a product to sell?

ML: Well, it was a decision I had to take and it wasn’t taken lightly. As soon as you start to make something then immediately you’re not impartial any more because you will profit from selling that substance. So the only thing you can do is make the supplement to the best of your current knowledge and make it in pure faith that you’re making it to help people.

I think as long as you stick to those principles then you’re ok.

HF: The supplement industry grows every year. Why should somebody pick your supplements over say, Maximuscle, PhD, USN etc?

ML: Well the first reason would be that it’s been born out of 12-15 years of in the trenches experimentation – learning by making mistakes and trying things out.

The second reason would be it’s all natural – there are no artificial sweeteners or anything like that in it. The flavours are from the ingredients only.

The third reason is that at the moment, it’s a totally unique formula. I’m sure in time it will be copied, but as it stands you’d have to buy three or four different supplements to get the same effect.

See part 1 of the Matt Lovell interview here.

Additional information: The formula is in a powder form, designed to be mixed with water.

You can also pick up a copy of Matt’s book, Palm Sized Plan on Amazon.

R5 retails for £39.99 and is available here www.aminoman.com.

R5 Aminos, Matt Lovell interview

P.S. I’m giving away a FREE eBook ‘101 Health and Fitness Tips’ to everyone who subscribes to my VIP email list. By joining the list you’ll have access to exclusive content, discounts, offers and products from both me and selected partners. Click here to download!

free health and fitness ebook

Published by

HoylesFitness

Owner of www.hoylesfitness.com. Personal Trainer, Father and fitness copy writer. Working hard making the world fitter and healthier!

3 thoughts on “Matt Lovell Interview – Part 2”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More Like This