YOUR GUIDE TO BURN FAT FAST!

At the Pen­ning­ton Biomed­i­cal Re­search Cen­ter, an Avengers-style team of ex­perts are work­ing to­gether to find new ways to win the war against fat. This is their re­port from the front lines—and what the find­ings mean for you.

Men's Health (Singapore) - - FRONT PAGE -

Ev­ery week over the past sev­eral months, a new vol­un­teer has checked into the “meta­bolic ward” at the Pen­ning­ton Biomed­i­cal Re­search Cen­ter in Ba­ton Rouge, Lou­i­si­ana. Each per­son stays for a to­tal of 24 days in the in­pa­tient unit. He or she is fed meals that are care­fully pre­pared and metic­u­lously mea­sured down to the calo­rie so that the daily to­tal caloric con­sump­tion will be less than what his or her body burns, re­sult­ing in weight loss. How much is the

IT’S IRONIC THAT WE’VE FO­CUSED SO LONG ON WHETHER IT’S GOOD OR BAD TO SKIP BREAK­FAST. DIN­NER, AND WHEN YOU EAT IT, MAY BE THE MOST IM­POR­TANT MEAL OF THE DAY. – COURYNEY PETER­SON, PH.D.

ques­tion.

Each of the 15 peo­ple in the study starts by spend­ing three days in­side one of Pen­ning­ton’s four meta­bolic cham­bers. Eric Ravussin, Ph.D., a pro­fes­sor of phys­i­ol­ogy, ge­nially de­scribes them as “like ho­tel rooms, but with a glass wall and pre­cise sensors.” Ev­ery in­hala­tion and ex­ha­la­tion is mea­sured to cal­cu­late their meta­bolic burn rate—and whether they’re burn­ing calo­ries from fat, pro­tein, or car­bo­hy­drates. The par­tic­i­pants next spend 18 days on the 222-acre cam­pus, with ev­ery meal and step of ex­er­cise recorded. Then they go back in the cham­ber for three days of eval­u­a­tion. Ravussin is mea­sur­ing in an ul­tra­pre­cise way not only how much weight the sub­jects drop but also how their meta­bolic rate is af­fected by cut­ting back their calo­ries.

Los­ing weight is hard enough, but keep­ing it off is even harder. Ravussin made head­lines with a re­cent Big­gest Loser study that re­vealed the dra­matic drop in calo­rie burn rate of par­tic­i­pants on the show, well be­low the rate of peo­ple who had al­ways been at that weight. So to stay at the same weight, a per­son who weighed 113kg and lost 23kg would have to eat less than a per­son who al­ways weighed 90kg.

“It’s like peo­ple who lose weight are al­most doomed to re­gain it be­cause of their high meta­bolic ef­fi­ciency,” he says. That’s why in this study Ravussin’s team is look­ing for ways to prop up peo­ple’s meta­bolic rate us­ing a new drug so that they don’t have to re­strict their food in­take so se­verely to keep off those lost pounds.

Obe­sity is like that ele­phant in­ves­ti­gated by the blind men in the In­dian fa­ble who ar­rive at dif­fer­ent con­clu­sions de­pend­ing on whether they’re hold­ing the trunk, the tusk, or the tail. Weight gain can be a re­sult of many dif­fer­ent, but of­ten co­ex­ist­ing, is­sues, from meta­bolic fac­tors and emo­tional prob­lems to lack of ex­er­cise and overeat­ing. Too of­ten these is­sues are stud­ied in iso­la­tion.

At Pen­ning­ton, they look at the whole ele­phant. An Avengers-style team of ex­perts are work­ing to­gether to find new ways to de­feat fat. The sit­u­a­tion is dire: Seven­ty­one per­cent of adults in Amer­ica are over­weight, with 38 per­cent of them obese, ac­cord­ing to the lat­est data from the CDC. Re­cently we spent a few days at Pen­ning­ton with the re­searchers and the high­tech hard­ware they’re us­ing to com­bat obe­sity. In ad­di­tion to the meta­bolic ward, we vis­ited Corby Martin, Ph.D.,

direc­tor of the cen­tre’s Inges­tive Be­hav­ior, Weight Man­age­ment & Health Pro­mo­tion Lab, who is jug­gling scores of feed­ing stud­ies in­ves­ti­gat­ing ev­ery­thing from how the pace of eat­ing af­fects sati­ety to how group dynamics in­flu­ence food choices at buf­fets. A scale in­vis­i­bly built into a ta­ble in the lab con­tin­u­ously records weight as food moves from plate to gul­let, and a hid­den video cam­era in the café records food choices.

In an­other lab, Owen Carmichael, Ph.D., a pro­fes­sor of brain and me­tab­o­lism imag­ing, runs a lab that uses func­tional mag­neti­cres­o­nance im­agery (fMRI) to bet­ter un­der­stand hunger at the level of the brain. His re­search is ex­plor­ing how neu­ral plea­sure cen­tres re­spond to dif­fer­ent foods. Draw­ing on Pen­ning­ton’s col­lec­tive ex­per­tise on weight loss, we iden­ti­fied seven “fat types”—seven ways your body, brain, and habits con­spire to pack on the pounds. You may be pre­dom­i­nantly one type, or you may be a mix of sev­eral, but you should be able to iden­tify your­self in this field guide to fat.

#1 THE CRAVER

You eat be­cause you’re lis­ten­ing to your body and your body is weak. It has a very hard time say­ing no to sug­ary, salty, fatty com­fort foods—the kinds that you know you shouldn’t be eat­ing at all, much less in mas­sive quan­ti­ties. But they taste so good you do it any­way.

Se­vere Cravers, says Carmichael, may tell the re­searchers some­thing like: “I’m driv­ing down the free­way and I see the Golden Arches, and it’s like the rest of the world goes away and there’s a trac­tor beam draw­ing me to it.” Carmichael, an en­gi­neer with a doc­tor­ate in ro­bot­ics, is lead­ing a team run­ning ex­per­i­ments on the cen­tre’s two fMRI ma­chines to see what parts of your brain light up, and how in­tensely, when you’re look­ing at com­fort foods ver­sus veg­eta­bles. Mean­while, Martin and his team use their spe­cific tools to iden­tify peo­ple with strong crav­ings. In stud­ies where the sub­jects choose their own foods, he as­sesses crav­ings with ques­tion­naires and notes how much of each food peo­ple eat. When Cravers are given craved foods, they are more likely to over­ride their sati­ety cues and fin­ish the plate, or go back for sec­onds. The in­sights the lab can’t pro­vide will come out in clin­i­cal set­tings, with study sub­jects dis­cussing their food is­sues and fill­ing out ques­tion­naires about habits and pref­er­ences. In this way, Martin is both the Al­fred Kin­sey of eat­ing-re­lated re­search and its Mas­ters and John­son, the guy who mea­sures and records what the rest of us merely talk about.

THE FIX:

The goal is to with­stand the temp­ta­tion of a spe­cific food or ven­dor. Let’s say you have a par­tic­u­lar weak­ness for baked goods. “We can’t just avoid bak­eries for the rest of our lives,” Martin says. “We have to live in har­mony with them.” To that end, he de­ploys what he calls “ex­po­sure with re­sponse pre­ven­tion,” or ERP. He might take a se­ries of group field trips to a bak­ery down­town. The first time, they walk past it. The sec­ond time, they linger for a few min­utes out­side. The goal is to build up enough re­sis­tance to the sights and smells that a Craver can buy a loaf of bread for the fam­ily with­out wolf­ing down three crois­sants be­fore

he hits the side­walk. Some of Martin’s temp­ta­tiondi­min­ish­ing tech­niques:

BREATHE DEEP: Take your mind off the food and put it on some­thing as neu­tral as breath­ing. It’s like a cold shower for your body’s overex­cited stress re­sponse.

THINK POS­I­TIVE: Imag­ine go­ing in for your next doc­tor’s ap­point­ment, and en­vi­sion how it will feel when you hit your weight and blood-sugar tar­gets. PLOT YOUR MOVES: Com­mon sce­nar­ios Martin will work through with his sub­jects in­clude how to go to a craw­fish boil (we’re talk­ing south­ern Lou­i­si­ana here) with­out blow­ing up your eat­ing plan, or a fam­ily din­ner where your mum ex­pects you to eat all your old favourite foods. An­tic­i­pate the caloric war zones and re­hearse how you’re go­ing to sur­vive them.

One of Martin’s re­search part­ners, Tim Church, M.D., Ph.D., an ad­junct Pen­ning­ton pro­fes­sor whose day job is de­vel­op­ing cor­po­rate weight loss pro­grammes, notes that it’s im­por­tant to fig­ure out whether you’re a true Craver— you want a par­tic­u­lar, ir­re­sistible food—or whether you’re sim­ply a crea­ture of habit. And if you’re a real-deal Craver, as in you can’t imag­ine life with­out cook­ies or fries or what­ever, of­ten the only work­able pre­scrip­tion is just say­ing no, full stop. “The an­swer for the crav­ing is ex­tinc­tion,” Dr. Church says. If foods you crave are in the house, throw them out. If you crave and eat cer­tain foods when you watch TV, you might have to not watch for a while un­til you get over the hump.

#2 THE EMO EATER

You’re com­pelled to eat by emo­tional fac­tors that have noth­ing to do with food it­self. The brakes might fail be­cause you had a bad day at work or a fight with your spouse, or your team’s best player just got in­jured. “Some of us han­dle our emo­tions just fine, and then some neg­a­tive event comes up and we go off,” Dr. Church says. “It could be drink­ing, smok­ing, or eat­ing,” or some com­bi­na­tion. Al­co­hol, for ex­am­ple, re­duces your in­hi­bi­tions to ev­ery­thing else, es­pe­cially food.

THE FIX:

“Know your trig­gers,” Dr. Church says. If they’re not im­me­di­ately ob­vi­ous, he says, “next time you go on a ben­der and eat a pint of ice cream, sit down right af­ter­ward and write down what’s up­set­ting you, as specif­i­cally as pos­si­ble. Un­peel the onion.”

John Old­ham, an IT guy from Topeka, Kansas, who lost, as un­be­liev­able as it

THE BEST EX­ER­CISE PRO­GRAM IS ONE THAT LEAVES YOU FEEL­ING EN­ER­GIZED, LIKE YOU CAN’T WAIT TO GET BACK OUT THERE AND HIT IT AGAIN. – TI­MOTHY CHURCH, M.D., PH.D.

sounds, 104kg on Nat­u­rally Slim, the cor­po­rate pro­gramme that Dr. Church helped de­sign, says he un­peeled the onion to discover that his dis­ap­point­ment with his ex-wife was driv­ing much of his out-of-con­trol eat­ing. “I stopped giv­ing con­trol to her,” he says.

Train your­self to put time be­tween the trig­ger­ing event and your re­ac­tion to it. “You’re head­ing for the re­frig­er­a­tor and you tell your­self, ‘Can I wait ten min­utes be­fore I do that?’ ” Dr. Church says. “‘And then ten min­utes af­ter that?’

”Deal with anx­i­etypro­duc­ing (and eat­ingtrig­ger­ing) emo­tional is­sues head-on with some kind of talk ther­apy. And cope with their phys­i­cal man­i­fes­ta­tions by draw­ing from the same menu of mind-body tech­niques that a Craver might use—for in­stance, mind­ful med­i­ta­tion or deep­breath­ing ex­er­cises. An­other so­lu­tion is to find an ac­tiv­ity that makes you feel bet­ter but doesn’t in­volve food. “Go for a walk or bike ride to clear your head,” says Martin. “That can pre­vent this spi­ral of mood.”

#3 THE GRAZER

At work, you’re the guy with the bowl of nuts or M&M’s on his desk who al­ways seems to be nib­bling on some­thing. In the evening, Martin says, you might sit down to watch TV with a bag of chips and end up eat­ing the whole bag.

THE FIX:

Martin calls this guy the “pas­sive over­con­sumer,” and the la­bel points to the so­lu­tion. You need to be­come an “ac­tive” or “mind­ful” eater by plan­ning meal sched­ules, in­clud­ing any snacks you need to keep hunger in check. Then you have to stick to them. If you’re go­ing to eat ice cream, “put a scoop in a bowl and put the car­ton back in the freezer,” Martin says.

Bryan McCul­lough, a Dal­las video pro­ducer who lost 40kg on Dr. Church’s pro­gramme, says, “A choco­late-chip cookie will al­ways sound good to me, but I know if I can have one af­ter my lunch, I don’t have to scarf up the cook­ies that some­one might bring to the of­fice.” Old­ham re­lies on smart­phone-driven food logs and fit­ness apps. “I track ev­ery­thing.”

Mind­ful eat­ing be­gins with an ac­cu­rate as­sess­ment of your hunger. “Clients will tell me, ‘I didn’t re­al­ize I was eat­ing when I wasn’t even hun­gry,’ ” Dr. Church says. “But if you’re hun­gry, you should eat. If you don’t, there’s a good chance you’ll over­com­pen­sate at your next meal.”

Just like the pseudo Craver, Dr. Church says, the Grazer can of­ten be sat­is­fied af­ter he sub­sti­tutes a low-calo­rie snack like a bunch of car­rots or soda water for the old high-calo­rie go-to.

But when you are sit­ting down to a real meal, Martin adds, it’s im­por­tant to fo­cus on and en­joy the food while you’re eat­ing it. “We train peo­ple to be mind­ful of the fact that they’re sit­ting down to eat and only to eat, not to also watch TV or read a book,” he says.

#4 THE LATE-NIGHT LOADER

For most of the day, you’re un­in­ter­ested in food. You skip break­fast and have a light lunch. But then at night, you start eat­ing. First there’s a large din­ner. The dishes are barely cleared away be­fore you’re snack­ing on high­calo­rie au­topi­lot.

“This back-load­ing of calo­ries re­ally does seem to pre­dis­pose peo­ple to be over­weight or obese,” Martin says. It’s more than a math prob­lem. Hu­man phys­i­ol­ogy is wired to sleep at night, and pre­lim­i­nary ev­i­dence in­di­cates that it’s bet­ter to eat our food early in the day and not to eat much at all in the evening. That’s why your body tem­per­a­ture and meta­bolic rate fall. Re­searcher Court­ney Peter­son, Ph.D., who earned her doc­tor­ate in physics from Har­vard be­fore mov­ing to Pen­ning­ton to study nu­tri­tion, has just com­pleted two ground-break­ing stud­ies on meal tim­ing. Her find­ings show that late-night eat­ing dis­rupts in­sulin sen­si­tiv­ity, raises blood pres­sure, and de­creases fat burn­ing. “We think that eat­ing later at night causes your body’s clocks to be in dif­fer­ent time zones, get­ting con­flict­ing sig­nals about whether or not to rev up me­tab­o­lism,” she says.

In one of her stud­ies, sub­jects ate all three daily meals be­tween 8:00 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. Early re­sults showed that they burned more fat and felt less hun­gry than a con­trol group eat­ing meals on a nor­mal sched­ule. Peter­son says the first group’s big­gest com­plaint was feel­ing too full on the com­pressed sched­ule, not feel­ing fam­ished at night­time.

One alum­nus of the study, Jeff Coslan, from In­de­pen­dence, Lou­i­si­ana, says he dreaded that over­stuffed feel­ing eat­ing din­ner in the early af­ter­noon, but at the end of the five­week test run, he’d lost weight and all of his num­bers—blood sugar, blood pres­sure, lipids— had sig­nif­i­cantly im­proved. Even your grand­par­ents wouldn’t con­sider hav­ing din­ner ear­lier than 4:00 p.m. But if the fi­nal re­search shows the same re­sults, there is a prac­ti­cal im­pli­ca­tion: Eat din­ner as early as you can, be­fore in­sulin sen­si­tiv­ity clocks out. “It’s ironic that we’ve fo­cused so long on whether it’s good or bad to skip break­fast,” Peter­son says. “Din­ner, and when you eat it, may be the most im­por­tant meal of the day.” THE FIX: PLAN EARLY MEALS: Work out a meal sched­ule that ends with din­ner by 7:00 p.m. FIND RE­PLACE­MENT AC­TIV­I­TIES: Un­til you’re fa­mil­iar with this new feed­ing pat­tern, look for ways to keep your­self busy that don’t in­volve food and drink— work­ing out, for ex­am­ple.

GET YOUR Z’S: Limit the late nights and you’ll cut down on the op­por­tu­ni­ties to ruin your eat­ing strate­gies. That’s es­pe­cially im­por­tant, if more chal­leng­ing, to do on

week­end nights, when most peo­ple overindulge. FRONT-LOAD YOUR DIET: Eat break­fast like a king, lunch like a prince, and din­ner like a pau­per.

SLOW DOWN: It takes roughly 20 min­utes for a full stom­ach to tell the brain to stop eat­ing. Only by eat­ing slowly will you give that feel­ing of sati­ety a chance to catch up.

#5 THE SWEET-SEEK­ING MIS­SILE

You’ve prob­a­bly heard that sugar is uniquely dam­ag­ing to your me­tab­o­lism, your waist­line, and your over­all health. And yet you just can’t stop your­self. It’s like you’re ad­dicted to the white pow­der. This “lone gun­man” the­ory that puts sugar at the cen­tre of ev­ery­thing that’s gone wrong with our diet sounds con­vinc­ing, and it cer­tainly sells a lot of books. But so far, the ev­i­dence is un­der­whelm­ing that sugar is much or any worse than other re­fined carbs like white flour. How­ever, since so many of the junk calo­ries we con­sume are in the form of sugar, it de­serves its new­found sta­tus as pub­lichealth en­emy num­ber one. (So long, sat­u­rated fat.)

THE FIX: DODGE STEALTH SUGAR:

Many pro­cessed foods have added sugar. The ob­vi­ous strat­egy is to read nu­tri­tion la­bels. But it only works if you know the many names for hid­den sugar. They in­clude: agave nec­tar, bar­ley malt syrup, caramel, corn syrup, dex­trose, fruc­tose, galac­tose, glu­cose, high-fruc­tose corn syrup, honey, lac­tose, mal­tose, maple syrup, mo­lasses, su­crose.

AVOID SUG­ARY DRINKS:

They pack a dou­ble punch— the calo­ries them­selves and the fact that the body doesn’t

reg­is­ter full­ness from liq­uids as read­ily as it does from solid food. Martin, Carmichael, and John Apolzan, Ph.D., are work­ing to­gether to mea­sure that sati­ety dif­fer­ence neu­ro­log­i­cally, feed­ing sub­jects ei­ther sug­ary taffy or a sug­ary liq­uid and then com­par­ing their fMRIs when they look at images of var­i­ous foods af­ter­ward.

RE­TRAIN YOUR TASTE BUDS:

Eat more whole foods, Martin says, and fewer pro­cessed foods. You’ll be cut­ting down on added sugar and calo­ries. “I call it weight loss through the back door,” he says. An ex­cel­lent first step: If you’re a snacker at work, trade the candy and dough­nuts for raw veg­eta­bles and fruit—be­sides be­ing healthy, the fruit will ap­pease the sweet tooth.

GO ON A LOW-CARB PLAN:

If your doc­tor tells you your blood-sugar level is on the high side (of­ten af­ter an above-nor­mal haemoglobin A1C test re­sult), go­ing on a low-carb diet may help. Avoid the “whites” (sugar, flour, bread, etc.) and load up on pro­tein—two grams per kilo of your goal body weight—and healthy fats.

#6 THE REGAINER

Even the most ded­i­cated di­eters strug­gle to main­tain their new, lower weight once the mo­ti­va­tion wears off and the hunger kicks in. Longterm weight-loss stud­ies, in fact, show a dis­turb­ing trend: Around the six-month mark, just about ev­ery­body stops los­ing weight and starts to put the weight back on. The prob­lem is that your weight-re­duced body is wired dif­fer­ently. You burn fewer calo­ries, and thanks to lower lev­els of lep­tin, a sati­ety hor­mone, you want to eat more. “It’s like you have a spring pulling you back to your orig­i­nal weight,” Ravussin says.

THE FIX:

While ex­er­cise typ­i­cally plays a small role in weight loss, it’s a ma­jor fac­tor in weight-loss main­te­nance. Dr. Church and Martin have pub­lished a new study that sug­gests that your body needs phys­i­cal ac­tiv­ity to get your ap­petite to match up with your en­ergy ex­pen­di­ture.

“Ex­er­cise is a safety valve,” Dr. Church says. “If eat­ing or not eat­ing an ex­tra 200 calo­ries ev­ery day makes the dif­fer­ence be­tween main­tain­ing a healthy weight and re­gain­ing it, then burn­ing off 1,000 calo­ries a week in the gym just makes the odds of pulling it off that much greater.”

Dr. Church’s stud­ies show that do­ing both car­dio and strength training is bet­ter than do­ing ei­ther one alone. En­durance ex­er­cise burns lots of calo­ries while you’re do­ing it, and lift­ing in­creases, or at least main­tains, mus­cle mass. The com­bi­na­tion helps clear sugar and fatty acids from your blood­stream, ei­ther by us­ing them for en­ergy or by stor­ing glu­cose in mus­cles while you re­cover from your work­outs.

KEEP A FOOD DI­ARY:

Ex­er­cise is just part of the so­lu­tion. Some­times you have to in­ven­tory all life­style el­e­ments, in­clud­ing diet. “For a lot of peo­ple, food di­aries are of­ten more trou­ble than they’re worth,” Church says. “But for the guy who keeps re­gain­ing, it’s su­per im­por­tant. He’s got to find out where he’s go­ing wrong.”

#7 THE CLUE­LESS COMPENSATOR

Dr. Church and Martin are pub­lish­ing a new study with a star­tling con­clu­sion. Study sub­jects who ex­er­cised a lot (220 min­utes a week on a tread­mill while be­ing watched like hawks by the Pen­ning­ton staff) didn’t lose any more weight than peo­ple who ex­er­cised about half as much. The study au­thors used some fancy lab sci­ence (the “dou­bly la­belled water” tech­nique to mea­sure en­ergy in­take and ex­pen­di­ture; don’t ask!) to ar­rive at a sim­ple find­ing. Peo­ple who ex­er­cise a lot feel that they’ve “earned” the right to eat sig­nif­i­cantly more calo­ries. Sorry, it doesn’t work that way.

THE FIX: DON’T OVER­ES­TI­MATE YOUR BURN:

At rest, your body burns about one calo­rie per kilo­gram of body weight per hour, or 91 calo­ries for a 90kg guy. Run 8km in an hour and you burn an ex­tra 686 calo­ries, which sounds like a lot un­til you re­al­ize it’s the equiv­a­lent of a large slice of cheesecake, which you can in­hale in less time than it takes to change out of your sweaty run­ning gear.

AVOID THE WORK­OUT/ VEG-OUT CY­CLE:

Your awe­some work­out can have a per­ni­cious side ef­fect that has noth­ing to do with food. If you’re so tired af­ter­ward that you move less than usual for the next day or two, you’re lucky if you break even on calo­ries in and out. “The best ex­er­cise pro­gramme,” says Dr. Church, “is one that leaves you feel­ing en­er­gized, like you can’t wait to get back out there and hit it again.”

GET YOUR ME­TAB­O­LISM IN OR­DER:

Dr. Church and Martin have found that sub­jects with high blood sugar and im­paired in­sulin re­sponse were three times as likely to overeat af­ter a work­out. Their work­ing the­ory is that they burn a higher per­cent­age of carbs when they ex­er­cise, caus­ing a drop in blood sugar, which in turn in­creases ap­petite. How­ever, over time, a steady pro­gramme of mod­er­ate, sub-max work­outs can im­prove your in­sulin sen­si­tiv­ity. When in­sulin is more re­spon­sive, you have less cir­cu­lat­ing blood glu­cose, burn a higher per­cent­age of fat for en­ergy, and feel less post-work­out hunger. Win, win, win!

STOP LOOK­ING FOR A RE­WARD:

The sub­jects in the Church-Martin study who thought they de­served a bonus for a hard work­out were more likely to com­pen­sate with calo­ries they couldn’t af­ford. You aren’t a child; you don’t need a treat for tak­ing your booster shot like a big boy. Ex­er­cise for its own sake, not for the choco­late chip Clif Bar you’ll give your­self when it’s over.

BROC­COLI ON THE PLATE AND MIND: MEAL PREP IN THE META­BOLIC WARD’S KITCHEN (LEFT AND RIGHT); FMRI VI­SU­ALS OF THE BRAIN’S BLOOD-OXY­GEN CON­TENT SHOW HOW NEU­RAL PLEA­SURE CEN­TRES RE­SPOND TO FOODS (CEN­TRE).

CHRISTO­PHER SANCHEZ, A VOL­UN­TEER, UN­DER­GO­ING A BIOELECTRICAL ANAL­Y­SIS TO FIND BODY-FAT PER­CENT­AGE.

STUDY PAR­TIC­I­PANT PATRICK VAN DUZEE IN THE META­BOLIC CHAM­BER, WHERE MA­CHINES MON­I­TOR THE AIR AND CAL­CU­LATE CALO­RIES BURNED

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Singapore

© PressReader. All rights reserved.