Career Catalyst

Engineering
a Healthy Body
These basic chemical engineering principles
expose common weight loss myths and
show you how to get into better shape
efciently and sustainably.

Nick Hallale, PhD

lthough many people are turning to expensive

fitness professionals, dieticians and nutritionists
to help them get into better shape, a chemical engineer has the knowledge and skills to achieve results that
are just as good or even better without the expensive
price tag. This article illustrates how the basic concepts
of chemical engineering mass and energy balances,
equilibrium, calorific values, selectivity, measurement and
control can be applied to the challenge.

where Energy In is the energy content of the food and drink

ingested and Energy Out is the amount of energy burned,
which is a combination of metabolic demands and physical
activity. Accumulation occurs when more energy is taken
in than is burned off. Excess energy is stored efficiently
as fat, so it accumulates in a very visible way on our
waistlines and other areas. Fortunately, the reverse is also
true if energy out exceeds energy in, the accumulation
becomes negative, which also has a visible effect.
So, isnt that just common sense to lose weight,
you need to eat less and exercise more? The answer is
yes and no. Unfortunately, its not that straightforward
in practice. Should you just eat less? Or just exercise
more? Or both? How much less should you eat? And what

should you eat? How much more exercise should you do?
Without some numbers and a structured approach, the
questions and decisions can become so overwhelming that
you may just give up. Fortunately, engineers think in terms
of numbers and a structured approach, and should find it
easy to estimate the energy in and energy out terms.
Energy in. Daily energy intake is extremely easy to calculate by recording the number of calories (or kilojoules)
contained in each and every bit of food or drink that you
consume. Most foods have nutritional information labels
that list their calorie content. In addition, numerous books
and websites reference the energy content of almost every
type of food and can be found by doing a search for nutritional data.
Energy out. Although there are various ways to estimate
energy use, these tend not to be as accurate as the energy
intake calculations. The most important part of energy
use is the metabolism a common term (e.g., I have a
slow metabolism), but one that many people do not fully
understand.
Metabolism refers to the amount of energy the body
needs just to keep it alive and functioning every day. Metabolism is analogous to the amount of power required to keep a
pump or boiler on standby. Even when it is not actually delivering any output to the process, it still has a power demand.
Many ways have been proposed for estimating metabolism. Some involve empirical measurements using expensive equipment, but those are not necessary for this purpose. Simple mathematical equations have been published
in the literature, such as the Harris-Benedict equation (1):

32

Copyright 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)

Energy balances
The most fundamental concept of weight loss is the
energy balance:
Energy In = Energy Out + Accumulation

www.aiche.org/cep

September 2010

CEP

Table 1. The total daily energy out is estimated

by multiplying the baseload metabolic rate
by a Harris-Benedict activity factor (1).

Equilibrium

Activity Factor

Sedentary (Little/no exercise and desk job)

1.2

Low (Light exercise/sports 13 days a week)

1.3

Moderate (Moderate exercise/sports 35 days

a week)

1.5

High (Hard exercise or sports 67 days a week)

1.75

Extreme (Hard daily exercise or sports and

physical job)

2.0

Energy Out, cal/d

Activity Level

5,000

4,000

Fat Loss Zone

3,000
Operating
Point

2,000

1,000
Fat Gain Zone

Men:
BMR = 66 + 6.23W + 12.7H 6.8A
Women: BMR = 655 + 4.35W + 4.7H 4.7A

Applying the energy map

The energy map is a chart of energy out vs. energy in,
with an individuals current position plotted as an operating point. Figure 1 shows an example of a person who
eats about 3,000 cal/d and expends only 2,500 cal/d. A
45-deg. line on the same plot represents the equilibrium
line, where energy intake balances energy expended
exactly. In theory, a person whose operating point is on the
equilibrium line would neither gain nor lose fat, but would
simply maintain what they have. The area to the right of
the equilibrium line represents a zone of fat gain, whereas
the area to the left represents a zone of fat loss. The further away from the equilibrium line, the larger the driving
force to either gain or lose fat, and the quicker results will
be achieved.
The person represented in Figure 1 is slowly, but surely,
gaining fat. To reverse this, he or she needs to operate on
the other side of the equilibrium line. Several trajectories
will achieve this, but not all of them are a good idea, such
as crash dieting.
Crash dieting involves a very sharp reduction in calorie
Copyright 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)

1,000
2,000
3,000
Energy In, cal/d

4,000

5,000

S Figure 1. Use an energy map to determine whether you will lose or

gain fat.
5,000
Equilibrium
Fat Loss Zone
4,000
Energy Out, cal/d

where BMR = baseload (or basal) metabolic rate, cal/d;

W = weight, lb; H = height, in; A = age, yr.
In addition to metabolism, energy is necessary for
activities such as walking, carrying things, and, more
significantly, exercising. To account for this, multiply your
baseload metabolic rate by an activity factor, such as those
by Fink et al. (1) in Table 1, to estimate your total daily
energy out. These factors are, in a way, similar to distillation tray efficiencies found in the literature indicative,
but not very accurate.
Once you have calculated your daily energy in and
energy out, you can quickly compare them on an energy
map to see if you are operating with a surplus or deficit.

3,000

Point B
Operating Point

2,000

1,000 Point C

Point D
Fat Gain Zone

0
0

1,000
2,000
3,000
Energy In, cal/d

4,000

5,000

S Figure 2. The bodys tendency to seek equilibrium is why crash

dieting is undesirable.

intake. Figure 2 shows what happens to a person who

slashes energy in to only 1,000 cal/d. The operating point
shifts to Point B, which is now very far to the left of the
equilibrium line and indeed there will be some rapid
weight loss initially.
Unfortunately, however, this is not sustainable, nor is
it pleasant or medically safe. The body responds to what
appears to be a famine by reducing its metabolism in order
to conserve energy. In this starvation mode, energy out
CEP

September 2010

www.aiche.org/cep

33

Career Catalyst

Table 2. Activities burn calories at different rates.

The total benefit depends on body weight. Source: (3).

5,000
Target
Equilibrium

Fat Loss Zone

Energy Out, cal/d

4,000

Activity

Exercise
only

Optimum?

3,000

Operating Point
Diet
only

2,000

1,000

Fat Gain Zone

0
0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

Energy Expended, cal/min

per lb of body weight

Chopping wood

0.135

Running (9-min mile)

0.087

Swimming

0.071

Basketball

0.063

Tennis

0.049

Cycling (9.5 mph)

0.045

Walking (road)

0.036

Mopping floors

0.028

Raking leaves

0.025

Ballroom dancing

0.023

Typing (electric)

0.012

Energy In, cal

Setting targets
Although the body is not stupid, it can be fooled. It is
possible to achieve sustainable weight loss by operating
with a moderate energy deficit. My experience has been
that a 500 cal/d deficit gives consistent weight loss without
triggering the bodys starvation defenses. This is consistent with modern medical opinion (2), where 500 cal/d is
considered to be a safe and healthy deficit.
The energy map can be modified (as in Figure 3) by
plotting a target line parallel to the equilibrium line, with
a 500-cal approach to equilibrium. Shifting the operating
point so that it lies somewhere on this target line is a better
approach to losing fat. In principle, it should not matter
what path is followed vertical, horizontal, or at some
angle in moving from the operating point to the target

line. In practice, however, there is an optimum trajectory.

This is where the concept of selectivity comes in.
A purely horizontal shift, i.e., only reducing energy in,
is one approach. If the shift is not as extreme as in Figure 2,
it should not trigger the starvation response. However, this
is still not the best approach there will be weight loss,
but the selectivity will be poor. The weight reduction will
come from a loss of both fat and muscle. People who follow
this approach often end up as a smaller version of their old
selves, with no improvement in body composition. They
may weigh less, but their body fat levels do not change. It is
far better to lose fat while preserving, or even adding, lean
muscle tissue, so that the percentage of body fat declines.
To achieve this objective, it is important to do some
form of exercise. A combination of cardio (aerobic) exercise and weight training is ideal. It is certainly possible to
reach the target profile through a purely vertical shift, i.e.,
by doing more exercise while consuming the same number
of calories. This is much better than a horizontal-only shift
because it provides the benefits of better health and fitness
in addition to weight loss. The problem with this approach
is that it might require an unrealistic amount of exercise.
The person in the example in Figure 3 would require 1,000
cal/d of exercise in order to achieve the vertical shift; for
many people, it could even be higher. This could translate
to an hour or two of hard exercise every day which is
not reasonable for most people.
A more realistic trajectory is a diagonal line, somewhere between the two extremes. First, determine how
many calories you are able to burn through exercising by
deciding how much time you can allocate to this, and then
look up the calories burned per minute. This information is
available from various sources, including Google. Table 2
gives approximate values for a range of selected activities

34

Copyright 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)

S Figure 3. A 500-cal approach to equilibrium is a good target.

decreases until it reaches the equilibrium line at Point C.

When this happens, the loss comes to a halt. Remember,
the body is not stupid and has a built-in tendency to seek
equilibrium.
Now the situation gets worse eventually the person,
discouraged by the lack of results, might return to his or
her previous eating habits. The operating point then moves
horizontally to Point D, where energy in returns to 3,000
cal/d. But now, energy out is still low, and could stay low
for a long time, doing long-term damage to the metabolism. Point D is even further from the equilibrium line than
the original operating point, and so the person could gain
weight back even faster than before. This would explain
the common yo-yo phenomenon among dieters. Clearly,
this isnt the answer.

www.aiche.org/cep

September 2010

CEP

5,000

Table 3. Meals can be designed that contain 400 cal

and stay within the target nutrient ratios.

Target
Equilibrium

Energy Out, cal/d

4,000

3,000

Fat Loss Zone

Target point
Operating Point

Example meal 1

Example meal 2

Example meal 3

One whole
egg and six egg
whites scrambled.

4 oz grilled
chicken breast

1 oz oatmeal

Two slices whole

wheat toast

3 oz brown rice
Three carrots

One sliced
banana

One apple
2,000

1,000
Fat Gain Zone
0
0

1,000

2,000
3,000
Energy In, cal/d

4,000

5,000

S Figure 4. Revise your energy map to determine your target food intake.

(3). These numbers are per pound of body weight; a larger

person will naturally use more energy than a smaller one
doing the same activity. For comparison, some everyday
activities are also included.
Once you know how many total calories you expect to
burn by exercising, shift your operating point on the energy
map vertically and then move left until you reach the target
line, as shown in Figure 4. This point indicates your target
food intake. In this example, a person who weighs 200 lb
and can spend about 45 min cycling would burn approximately 400 cal, so he or she moves upward by that amount.
Shifting left from this point reveals that energy in should
be around 2,400 calories per day. This stepping is similar to
the McCabe-Thiele method for distillation calculations.

Designing a meal plan

Once you have established how many calories you
should eat, you can design meals to meet this requirement. The first question is how the daily calories should be
broken up. Opinions vary about the best number of meals,
but I believe this comes down to individual preference. For
instance, the person in the example likes to eat many small
meals throughout the day and breaks up the 2,400 cal into
six meals of 400 cal each.
What foods should this consist of? Again, opinions
are extremely divided. My experience is that a balanced
approach is best. There is no magic ratio, but I believe that
somewhere in the range of 3050% protein, 3050% carbohydrates and 1020% fat is a good balance for someone who
wants to shed fat and improve body composition. Although I
do not agree with any of the trendy ultra-high-protein diets,
not eating sufficient protein is a mistake. Protein is one of
Copyright 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)

Two scoops
whey protein
mixed with water

32% protein

40% protein

39% protein

50% carbohydrates

44% carbohydrates

48% carbohydrates

18% fat

16% fat

13% fat

the building blocks of muscle tissue, and it helps to improve

the selectivity previously discussed.
Natural (unprocessed) fat is also important and should
not be eliminated. Fats are required to synthesize many of
the hormones that regulate the bodys biochemical processes
including the process of burning fat and adding muscle
(4). Ironically, cutting fats out of your diet can actually make
you fatter!
It should be easy for a chemical engineer to design individual meals that have the correct number of total calories
and are composed of foods and nutrients in the right ratios.
Essentially, it is a combined mass and energy balance using
calorific values. Protein and carbohydrates both contain 4
cal/g, while fat contains 9 cal/g. This information, together
with nutritional data, can be used to figure out the optimal
amounts of each component. If you want to get fancy, you
can design a spreadsheet with LOOKUP tables that solves
a set of linear equations simultaneously.
Table 3 lists a few examples of meals that have been
calculated to provide 400 cal while staying within the target nutrient ratios. The larger your database of foods (and
your imagination), the more combinations you can design.

Calorie calculations revisited

When designing your meals, its best to use natural
foods. However, this is not always practical, and many
people find it necessary to eat some processed food. This is
not entirely bad, as there are many suitable packaged foods
on the market. However, dont automatically assume that
foods marketed as healthy options are actually good for
you. Chemical engineering enables us to see through the
misleading claims made by some food manufacturers.
Consider a hamburger that is labeled 92% fat free!
This sounds promising, but you cant fool a chemical engineer so easily. The nutrition facts for this product, shown
in Figure 5, tell a very different story. On a weight basis,
the fat is only 8% (9 g out of 4 oz [113 g] is 8%), but this is
totally irrelevant. To find the real percentage of fat, divide
CEP

September 2010

www.aiche.org/cep

35

Career Catalyst

W Figure 5. The nutrition facts label

makes it easy to perform calorie
calculations.

the calories from fat by the

total number of calories. Ignore
the weights this is a trick to
distract us.
The nutritional facts label
lists 160 total calories and 81
cal from fat. (U.S. food labels
list fat calories explicitly, but
this is not true in all countries. To calculate the calories
from fat, multiply the total grams of fat by 9. I recommend
calculating total calories and calories from fat from first
principles as a cross-check.)
The true fat content of the hamburger is actually:
% fat = 81/160 100 = 50.6%
So instead of 92% fat-free, a bit of basic chemical
engineering reveals that the hamburger is more than half
fat not such a healthy option after all!
If youre a typical chemical engineer, you are probably
curious about why there is such a big discrepancy. Look
at the mass balance. Notice that the weights on the label
do not total 4 oz they add up to about 30 grams. But 4
oz is 113 g what happened to the other 83 g? The label
does not say, but most of it is probably water. If you base a
fat percentage on food weight, the water dilutes the fat,
making it seem lower than it really is.
Now that you are aware of this trick, what do you think
of 2% milk?

Iron as a catalyst
You can use iron as a catalyst to speed up the process
and enhance selectivity, although this does not refer to
catalysts in the traditional sense. It is about pumping iron
i.e., weight training.
Weight training is an excellent tool for both men and
women, and it brings many benefits that are not offered by
other types of exercise. First, it improves body composition by stimulating lean muscle growth. Second, the new
muscle tissue increases metabolism, so your daily energy
consumption will increase and your operating point will
move up even when you are resting. Finally, weight training stimulates the secretion of hormones that control the
biochemical processes involved in burning fat (5).
However, several common misconceptions discourage
people from weight training. The first is that it will make a
person too bulky. This is not true. Bodybuilding is only one
of many ways to use weights. Most people who train with
weights become less bulky, because muscle is denser than
36

www.aiche.org/cep

September 2010

CEP

fat and the body becomes trimmer and more streamlined.

Weight exercises that help promote a lean physique
tend to involve the entire body and several joints rather
than concentrating on one area. Examples include walking
lunges, deadlifts, and the clean-and-press, as well as more
exotic movements like swinging weights, or even jumping while holding weights. Many of these movements are
similar to the events in the ancient Olympic games, where
the participants had athletic physiques but were not overly
bulky. These exercises are also excellent for burning calories they involve moving relatively heavy weights over
large distances, and Work = Force Distance.
On the other hand, typical bodybuilding exercises focus
on a single muscle group and usually involve only one joint.
Some examples are bicep curls (which focus on the biceps
and use the elbow), leg extensions (quadriceps and knees),
and chest flyes (concentrate on the chest and mainly use
the shoulder joint). Because these exercises isolate a single
muscle group and subject it to a concentrated force, they
are very good for stimulating bulk. But they dont offer as
much of a fat-burning effect during training, because the
distances traveled by the weights tend to be shorter.
The second myth about weight training is that muscles
will turn into fat when a person gets older. A chemical
engineer (or someone who has studied basic organic chemistry or biology) should know that muscle and fat are two
totally different kinds of compounds. One cannot just turn
into the other.

Monitoring and control

Chemical engineers working in a production environment know how crucial process monitoring and control
are. Getting into better shape is no exception to this. It is
crucial to track your progress and make adjustments along
the way.
First, consider what you should track. Contrary to popular belief, it is not your weight. Nor is it the widely used
body-mass index (BMI), which is based on your weight-toheight ratio. (The BMI method was probably not invented
by a chemical engineer, who would know about density.)
Since muscle is denser than fat, it is possible to remain the
same weight or even become heavier while concurrently getting leaner, smaller, and healthier. Benchmarks
like ideal weight and BMI can be very misleading, especially for athletic people. Even though I have a size-32
waist and a six-pack abdomen, my BMI tells me that I
am clinically overweight and only a few BMI points short
of being obese.
The correct variable to track is actually body fat content. Several methods for estimating body fat are available. A simple one developed by Hodgdon and Beckett for
the U.S. Navy (6) requires only a tape measure:
Copyright 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)

25.0%

Body Fat

20.0%
15.0%

Better than plan!

Probably okay to eat
a little more.

Deviation from plan.

Time to take action!

10.0%
Plan
Actual

5.0%
0%
0

10 11 12

Weeks

S Figure 6. Regular process monitoring shows when you are deviating

from your plan and need to take action.

Men:
F = 86.010log10(WC NC) 70.041log10(H) + 36.76
Women:
F = 163.205log10(WC + HC NC) 97.684log10(H) 78.387
where F = body fat, %; H = height, in.; WC = waist circumference, in.; NC = neck circumference, in.; HC = hips
circumference, in. All measurements must be taken to
within 1/4 in.
You can plot your goal as a straight line on a chart of
body fat vs. time. Figure 6 shows a plan to lose one-half
percentage point per week. This is feasible for most people
operating with an energy deficit, eating sufficient protein,
and exercising with weights.
Every week, take your measurements, calculate your
body fat, and plot the point on the chart. A point on or
below the straight line is a good sign, whereas a point above
the line indicates that something is not working. If there
is no improvement for several consecutive weeks, it is a

Literature Cited
1.
2.
3.

4.
5.
6.

Fink, H., et al., Practical Applications in Sports Nutrition, 2nd

ed., Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, MA (2008).
U.K. Dept. of Health, http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/index.htm.
Editors of the Univ. of California at Berkeley Wellness Letter,
The New Wellness Encyclopedia, Houghton Mifflin, New
York, NY (1995).
Erasmus, U., Fats That Heal, Fats That Kill, Alive Books,
Burnaby, BC, Canada (1993).
Hofmekler, O., Maximum Muscle, Minimum Fat, 2nd ed.,
North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, CA (2008).
Hodgdon, J., and Beckett, M., Prediction of Percent Body Fat
for U.S. Navy Men and Women from Body Circumferences and
Height, Reports No. 84-29 and 84-11, Naval Health Research
Center, San Diego, CA (1984).

Copyright 2010 American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE)

strong warning sign that something needs to be changed.

Perhaps your calorie intake needs to be checked, your level
of exercise should be increased, or the ratios of nutrients in
your diet should be adjusted. It is important to do something
and not ignore the warning signs.
A common cause of a slowdown in results is that the
body has become acclimated to your routine. Remember,
the body likes equilibrium and will settle there if you let
it. So it is a good idea to vary your workouts frequently
in order to shock the body away from equilibrium. You
may also want to try an occasional day of overeating, just
in case the body is starting to think there is a famine
coming and is turning down the metabolism. Once you
have attained your goals, you can adjust your diet and/or
exercise routine so that you maintain equilibrium.

Final thoughts
The connection between chemical engineering and getting into better shape brings a scientific approach to your
efforts, rather than blindly following someone elses advice
and hoping for the best.
This is not just an academic discussion by applying
the principles I have described, I have lost over 40 lb and
8 in. from my waist. More importantly, I have also kept it
off for two years.
Finally, anyone working in the process industries
knows that health and safety considerations are foremost,
and this is certainly also the case here. That means you
should aim for a gradual improvement that is sustainable.
Do not be tempted by drastic measures and fad diets. These
often do more harm than good in the long term. Although
my title is Dr., please be aware that this comes from my
PhD in chemical engineering and that I am not a medical
doctor. You should consult your own doctor before putting
any of the ideas in this article into practice.
CEP

NICK HALLALE, PhD, is the creator of The Apollo Program, a novel system
that combines chemical engineering principles with the classical
Greek approach to health and tness (Phone: +44 (0)7939659392;
Website: www.apollo-program.com; Email: nick@apollo-program.
com). An internationally recognized expert in pinch technology, he has
provided consulting services to companies around the world as well as
the British government, and has delivered presentations at numerous
AIChE meetings. He taught at the Univ. of Manchester for three years,
has published around 40 journal papers and articles, and contributed
to two textbooks and the Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical
Technology. In his mid-30s, unhappy with his poor health and physical
condition, he decided to apply his chemical engineering background to
the challenge of getting back into shape. He superimposed mass and
energy balancing and other engineering concepts onto his extensive
research into the diet and exercise methods employed by ancient
Greek athletes. He tested the system on himself with great success,
documented his transformation, and created a downloadable 12-week
course that emulates the classical Greek ideal of a natural, athletic
body. This is his third article for CEP, and he burned an estimated 2,500
cal while typing it! He holds a BSc and PhD in chemical engineering
from the Univ. of Cape Town.

CEP

September 2010

www.aiche.org/cep

37