Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

          

Show ALL Forums
Posted In Forum:

Home   login   MyForums  
 
 Author Thread: Diverticulitis
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 6 (view)
 
Diverticulitis
Posted: 11/11/2009 4:22:53 PM
C'mon people, keep up.

In the largest study ever done, nuts, seeds, popcorn, corn, et. al. were determined not to pose an increased risk for diverticulitis complications. In fact, there is an inverse relationship between the consumption of these foods and diverticulosis.

http://www.britannica.com/bps/additionalcontent/18/35334784/Nuts-ampPopcorn-May-ReduceNot-RaiseDiverticulitis-Danger
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 7 (view)
 
Please beware of the dangers of Acetaminophen! (Tylenol!)
Posted: 11/6/2009 6:26:01 AM
If I might offer a different perspective here which could underscore a bit of what the OP is attempting to convey, there is a glaring descrepancy among the drugs banned and approved by the FDA with regards to the potential for overdose and adverse (sometimes even fatal) reactions.

The FDA can also rightly be accused of being highly inconsistent in deeming which drugs are OTC versus prescription-required. To the OP's point, there are drugs which do not cause hospitalization and death at the rate attributed to acetaminophen but require prescriptions to obtain. There are drugs declared illegal by the FDA which have proven medical benefits and have litte to no risk of overdose and death.

Take the OPs message for what it's worth. There is a broad assumption by the general public that if a drug is OTC there is little risk for lethal overdose. This assumption is based on a mis-guided faith that the FDA is consistent in applying its rules on the availability and legalization of drugs.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 12 (view)
 
How can a man over 35 get more or boost of energy?
Posted: 10/24/2009 5:57:18 AM

hi... fyi coffee hurts the kidneys even if they are debating the blood pressure issue


TOO MUCH COFFEE has been linked to kidney problems (6 or more cups per day). Then again TOO MUCH WATER causes Hyponatremia and can kill you.

Caffeine can exacerbate pre-existing medical conditions but the truth of the matter is, caffeine up to 300 mg per day has been repeatedly shown to have little to no ill-effects on the body.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 3 (view)
 
St. John's Wort
Posted: 9/26/2009 7:20:17 AM
Just to be clear, St John's Wort doesn't appear to harm the liver per se, but can affect or interfere with the way the body processes certain drugs that rely on the liver's enzyme system for delivery. In other words, St John's Wort taken in combination with other drugs can render those drugs less or more potent than the intended effectiveness as the prescribed dosage.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 8 (view)
 
HRM - Maffetone Method - 180 Formula
Posted: 8/21/2009 12:21:30 PM
I think for the purpose of this discussion, you need to qualify your statements down to the context of what is good or bad for endurance training - since that is what Maffetone has written about.

There are many types of fitness and each has its own methods for achievement.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 8 (view)
 
When Your Family Sabotages.... And Support Systems
Posted: 7/20/2009 8:21:04 AM
I can totally relate. It's not just family that pushes food on you, it's just about everyone in your social and work circles.

Don't be afraid to stand your ground. Yes, people will give you a hard time and some will respond unkindly to you when you refuse food, but they don't live with your health, you do.

I refuse politely at first, insistently on a second offer, and down right pissed off if they persist. It may take awhile, but people eventually get the picture and back off. From my point of view, they should feel fortunate that I don't retaliate with a lecture on their eating habits in response to their offer of unhealthy and/or excess food.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 37 (view)
 
A nice tasting Protein Shake?
Posted: 7/18/2009 5:13:33 AM
Well, protein powders are not exactly designed to tickle the tastebuds. Sure, it's nice if the stuff doesn't taste flat-out GROSS, but for the most part, INOFFENSIVE is the most that I hope for.

Digestibility is more important.


^^^^This^^^^

Diet is more than half the equation in health and fitness. As such, one needs to change the mindset and acknowledge that food is fuel for the body rather than fodder for the palate, otherwise failure is your destiny.

"Can't", "won't", and "don't" is the mantra for the uninspired and unmotivated. It takes what, less than a minute to down a protein shake? Suck it up man, buy and use a protein shake that gives your body rather than your taste buds the best benefit.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 47 (view)
 
Healthy at a low BMI?
Posted: 6/30/2009 2:44:34 PM

Good lord. My BMI is 20 and I weigh 170 at 5 " tall (yes, five feet)...


Might want to check your calculation again.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 4 (view)
 
How long should you excersise
Posted: 6/25/2009 8:33:02 AM

High reps with low weight is just pointless.. Just lift something heavy if you want to build your muscles and strengthen them as well.


While not pointless, low weight high reps does little to significantly increase lean muscle mass.

The OP's question is how long should you exercise. Low weight high reps burns calories, just not as effectively as HIIT when framed within the context of energy expended during exercise.

However, for truly effective weight loss one needs to take into consideration RMR - or resting metabolic rate. I.e., calories burned while at rest. Lean muscle mass burns more calories at rest than the equivalent amount of body fat. So, if you want to burn more calories throughout the day while at rest then you must increase your lean muscle mass - which is most effectively done by lifting heavy at low reps.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 25 (view)
 
Healthy at a low BMI?
Posted: 6/21/2009 5:29:14 AM
Frankly, I'd like to see health insurance premiums adjusted for fitness the way car insurance premiums are adjusted for safe drivers.

BMI could be one factor in an overall health assessment to determine how much burden one should assume in terms of paying health insurance. It would be up to the physician administering the health assessment to give an individual a waiver if they indeed displayed a healthy fat/muscle ratio but fell outside the BMI guidelines.
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 4 (view)
 
WEEKLY BLOG: Certified Short Guy says...
Posted: 6/6/2009 8:51:51 AM
When learning how to ride a bike, training wheels serve a very good purpose. Eventually though, you'll need to take them off if you want to excel.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 6 (view)
 
HIT Workout
Posted: 5/29/2009 1:25:44 PM

Hey guys just recently decided to slow down on mass building and start to tone it up a bit more...


If I may translate. "Hey guys, just recently decided to slow down on gaining weight and start to lose weight..."

As one poster already stated, it's all about your diet. Well, at least 90% is about your diet.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 11 (view)
 
Should You Take Exercise Advice From Out of Shape People?
Posted: 5/22/2009 6:16:33 AM
I've often pondered the same of overweight nutritionists whose job it is to counsel heart attack victims.

It's a good thing I'm not a hospital administrator because I would hold nutritionists to practicing what they preach or else they'd seek employment elsewhere.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 7 (view)
 
Braces on a 40 yr old?
Posted: 5/20/2009 4:46:25 PM
Bassgirl,

When you say you're doing it for your profile, do you have an overjet as well as an overbite? Is your ortho going to be expanding your arches?

If you haven't already discovered it, there's a website for adults in braces. archwired.com. Make sure to check out the forums over there as well.

Good luck!
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 5 (view)
 
Braces on a 40 yr old?
Posted: 5/16/2009 5:17:36 AM

can you eat peanut butter with braces on?


Of course you can; and I do, every day.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Braces on a 40 yr old?
Posted: 5/13/2009 8:23:54 AM
Well, if it makes you feel any better, I won't get my braces off until I'm 52.

I'm not sure what you mean by whether braces have affected me physically. I can tell you that it's not a pain-free experience. I can also tell you that you will get sores inside your mouth. On the other hand, I'm an adult. If kids can endure braces then it's pretty silly of me to complain about the inconveniences of wearing braces.

Socially? I'm oblivious to any social impact because I refuse to be self-conscious about wearing braces.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 2 (view)
 
I know the workout, I WANT to workout but...
Posted: 4/27/2009 1:46:38 PM
It's called burn-out.

Why do so much?

Scale it back so that your total workout time in any single day is no more than 1 hour. Certainly 1 hour a day is far better than nothing because you burned out doing 3 hours a day.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 6 (view)
 
Supplement help for a hardgainer?
Posted: 4/27/2009 8:38:57 AM
I wish science could come up with a way to accurately and conveniently measure body fat. Then perhaps people wouldn't make what I consider a mistake by focusing too much on total body weight.

Like Ironman and a couple of others said, it is very difficult to add any significant lean muscle mass in a short time. Genetics certainly play a part, but generally speaking, adding anything more than 10 to 20 lbs of pure muscle mass over a 12-month period is out of reach for most people - and that all depends on how much you have to begin with since there will always be diminishing returns with genetics determining your limit.

Likewise with losing weight, why do people always make it a race to add or lose weight by a given time frame? Change your lifestyle for the better. Focus on body fat rather than total weight. In the absence of reliable methods, look in the mirror to gauge your progress. In the long run, given a healthy lifestyle, a healthy muscle/fat ratio will determine your ideal weight.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 5 (view)
 
SWINE FLU and Dating....
Posted: 4/27/2009 8:12:13 AM
The great flu pandemic of 1918 killed from 2.5-5% of the world human population.

So the question is, what about you would put you in the 95-97% category verses the remaining category?
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Is Fitness a Lifestyle or a Sport for most folks?
Posted: 4/27/2009 8:04:59 AM
Hmmm, just like with the traditional political two-party system of Republicans and Democrats, I fall somewhere in between.

While my diet is specific and might be defined as rigorous, it is not designed to "produce a desired rip". Rather, it is designed to fuel my body and to attain my highest priority, which is longevity.

I work out 5, and on occasion, 6 days a week for 45 to 90 minutes - depending on whether I'm doing cardio (45 minutes) or weights (90 minutes). I rarely deviate from this unless I'm on vacation. However, when I participate in a physical activity (tennis, softball, bowling, etc.) I do so for the sheer enjoyment and I'm not concerned with performing at an extreme level.

Like the OP, I look for opportunities to expend energy like mowing the grass, taking the stairs instead of escalators, and choosing parking spots a good distance from my target destination.

But all of this is simply part of my lifestyle. I don't nor do I have any desire to compete - even with myself. I don't set targets for cardio or 1 rep maximums in weights. I do whatever my energy and strength allows for that day.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 4 (view)
 
trying to lose weight, any help appreciated :D
Posted: 4/25/2009 9:28:17 AM
I'll just add this from the mayoclinic.com article titled "Weight loss: 6 strategies for success":

3. Set a realistic goal
When you're considering what to expect from your new eating and exercise plan, be realistic. Healthy weight loss occurs slowly and steadily. Aim to lose 1 to 2 pounds (0.5 to 1 kilogram) a week. To do this, you need to burn 500 to 1,000 calories more than you consume each day, through a low-calorie diet and regular exercise.

Make your goals "process goals," such as exercising regularly, rather than "outcome goals," such as losing 50 pounds (23 kilograms). Changing your process — your habits — is the key to weight loss. Make sure that your process goals are realistic, specific and measurable, for example, you'll walk for 30 minutes a day, five days a week.


Ignoring for a moment the article's recommendation NOT TO SET AN OUTCOME GOAL, using their guideline of 1 to 2 lbs a week loss would result in a realistic goal of anywhere from 32 lbs to 64 lbs over an 8 month period.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 2 (view)
 
trying to lose weight, any help appreciated :D
Posted: 4/25/2009 7:01:40 AM

OP

That amount of weight is unrealistic and you will do more damage to your body than good.

Key things to know.

Adopt a lifestyle that you can live with for the rest of your life.

Understand that a healthy lifestyle is key to a healthy weight.

If you live healthy your body will take care of its self.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I'll throw out a number here and I'd be surprised if I'm that far off when I say that 90% of weight-loss efforts fail in the long run because people set unrealistic goals and approach weight-loss as a project rather than a lifetime commitment to change.

Do what you want, but if you really want to succeed then re-read JB III's post and first, let it sink in and then second, work toward doing what he's posted.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 39 (view)
 
Tips for the you peeps!
Posted: 4/24/2009 12:08:34 PM
Anyone else here in the second year of med school? I doubt it. Any doctors here? I doubt it. I'm gonna tell you how Ironman is right, and jumbie thinks he's right. First of all, dextrose IS absorbed quickly, and at the same time it has the ability to make other nutritents be absorbed along with it. An example of how this works is kind of like a big ship that creates a wave behind it that can suck in other smaller vessels. So lets say dextrose is the big ship, it passes by the protein on the way to the muscle, since protein is a much smaller ship it gets stuck in the wave created by dextrose while dextrose was passing by. Dextrose then carries it off to the muscle. I could of used the ar driving behind the transport example, but ships are more fun to me. Anyway, this is how it works. So, will you get faster protein absorption by combining the two? Yes. Will that hinder catabolism? Obviously.


Thanks for demonstrating why doctoral degrees aren't given out after two years of medical school. I certainly hope the example you gave isn't what they're teaching you in school, unless of course you plan on being a mortician.

Your over-simplification can't be construed to be even remotely accurate as it doesn't address the different states of pre-exercise, exercise, and post-exercise and how each phase determines how and when carbohydrate metabolism occurs and its effect on net muscle glucose utilization.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 33 (view)
 
Tips for the you peeps!
Posted: 4/24/2009 11:08:17 AM
The only thing you'll ever hear me claim is a desire for longevity. Every thing I do; diet, exercise, stress management, and mental calisthenics, is toward that single goal.

I think in terms of nutrition, it's important to note that while it is very important in bodybuilding, bodybuilders are not known for longevity. So bodybuilding to the extent that you and others are involved in competition is not a healthy endeavor.

I've never given tips on how to gain muscle or how to attain low body fat - so let's cease with putting words in my mouth.

I've studied nutrition for about as long as you've been alive. Above all else, I've learned that there are a lot of myths floating around perpetuated by people like you who succumb to word of mouth education and and so-called experts out to make a buck by manipulating and misinterpreting the results of scientific studies.

You will never hear a word of nutritional advice out of my mouth unless I can support it with sound peer-reviewed scientific studies. Do I practice certain nutritional strategies that don't have a lot of science behind them, yes, but I would never presume to think I am right and suggest to people they follow what I do. Apparently you have no such qualms - and I will continue to call you out on the carpet every time you post as fact that which has yet to be proved.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 29 (view)
 
Tips for the you peeps!
Posted: 4/24/2009 10:42:39 AM
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I rest my case. Long on ranting but short on substance.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 14 (view)
 
diet science and weight lifting?
Posted: 4/24/2009 9:10:19 AM

Hmmm Steko...
Your validity here will be based on how you come across, the info you put out and does it have any merit.

With that out of the way, you mentioned whey protein and creatine where the only legit supplements, hopefully you arent discounting multi vitamins, fish oils, anti oxidants etc.


Not to mention that his credibility is in question because he makes no mention of casein protein.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 27 (view)
 
Tips for the you peeps!
Posted: 4/24/2009 8:23:14 AM

Jumbie564 --- the day I take advice from someone like you is the day pigs fly!!!!! You are a moron who knows nothing about fitness!!! I see people like you in the gym all the time. They think they know everything just because they starved themselves and did way too much cardio and got into decent shape. They look like crap and yet they argue with guys who get into amazing shape while STILL RETAINING BIG AMOUNT OF MUSCLE MASS. I must be doing something right if I can diet to low body fat while at same time hold on to my muscle mass. Its one thing to just diet but it takes lot more knowledge to know how to diet and not lose muscle mass. If you hung out with bodybuilders who actually compete every year you would be nothing but a JOKE to every single one of them. Everything you say is nothing but BS. You think just because you read study or two that it makes you freaking expert! The difference between you and me is I read a lot of studies, one study might say that the other one is wrong, but what I do is I actually talk to athletes who do this FOR A LIVING and then I apply it to myself to see it makes a difference. For every study their are tons of other studies that say other wise!!!


Feel better? Just to set the record straight, I never have nor will I ever give advice to you. Secondly, you claim that everything I say is 'BS' yet not once have you ever been able to prove it. Instead, you go on some rant that I can only assume is some sort of defense mechanism to cover up for your inability to argue your points intelligently and with facts.

Dextrose does help shuttle protein into the blood stream faster after workout!!!! Thats why person gets drunk faster when they drink sugary hard liquir!!!! LOL it was even common scence to me when i was little kid in Russia that person gets drunk faster when their is sugar in alcohol. Go talk to anyone who has been in fitness/bodybuilding for while and every single one of them will tell you the same thing and that’s if you look at recovery bodybuilding drinks they all have 20-30grams of sugar in their. Not only did I read this in a study but Chad Nicholls and Chris Aceto who trained 3 different MR.Olympias say the same thing. So like I said the day I take advice from someone like you over world class nutritionists who train Mr.olympias is the day PIGS WILL FLY!!!


Ah, now it's DEXTROSE when before it was just sugar. Setting aside that bit of change in direction for a moment, let's examine your logic concerning sugary hard liguor and your premise that the sugar content gets you drunk faster. Care to provide any proof that sugar speeds up alcohol absorption? Let me help you, you can't, because it isn't true. In fact, combining alcohol with carbohydrates, proteins, or any other food source actually slows down the rate of alcohol absorption. Now, I'll give you a little tip in case you want to save some money the next time you're out drinking. Mix your alcohol with a mixer containing ARTIFICIAL sweetners, then you'll get drunk faster. Apparently the 'common sense' you learned in Russia may very well be common, but it certainly isn't sense.

Now, back to your DEXTROSE (sugar) argument. I'll begin by stating that your examples of bodybuilders and their success as proof of nutritional knowledge is laughable. In fact, it's just as laughable as your contention that because you have a muscular physique by default, you must be qualified to speak on nutrition. Perhaps if you'd just shut your mouth people *might* assume you know about nutrition; but you remove all doubt of any expertise in the field with almost every post you make on the subject. Let me ask you something, do you think just because someone is a successful race car driver that automatically qualifies them as master mechanics?

This whole Dextrose/Protein = insulin spike= muscle growth is an old theory and based on a couple of studies that have been grossly misinterpreted by those who stand to gain money from selling supplements and books. As it relates to bodybuilding it has little merit. Basically it comes down to an interpretation of the studies by Ivy and Portman in terms of the "pro" dextrose camp. However, not much of Ivy and Portman's interpretation is actually supported by scientific literature. They tout the supposed benefits of "fast-digesting carbohydrates and protein." However, the data pertains to fasted subjects, training to glycogen depletion. The extrapolation of results under such conditions to strength athletes, training fed, is fallible. Just for starters, weight resistance training almost NEVER results in glycogen depletion assuming proper nutrition. And what exactly do you think the body does with simple carbohydrates if glycogen stores are not depleted?

Dont tell me you dont have muscles because you are 50 years old. Fact of the matter is, i see lot of 50-60 year olds who look amazing. The difference between them and you is that they actually listen to guys who DO THIS FOR A LIVING. You keep talking about studies , but the best study of them all are bodybuilders/athletes, we are actually not afraid to experiment with our bodies to see if something works or not. I have been doing this since i was 13 years old. I live in bodybuilding world and I hang out with pro bodybuilders and nutritionists. Go crawl back into your own little world where you hang out with guys who know nothing about fitness where to them you actually sound like you know what you are talking about. I competed and won illinois shows among others. Im training for nationals for next year. People paid me money to get them into shape and i did that within few months!


I do ok for a 50-year old. [See http://bodyspace.bodybuilding.com/theKurp/] Keep in mind that for me, staying in shape means more than just building muscles. In fact, you don't get to critique me until you turn 50. Then we'll compare apples to apples.

Since you seem to think throwing out names and using bodybuilders to support your claims about nutrition, I'll play along. Ever hear of Alan Aragon?
http://www.alanaragon.com/ Alan Aragon has over 15 years of success in the fitness field. He earned his Bachelor and Master of Science in Nutrition with top honors. Alan is a continuing education provider for the Commission on Dietetic Registration, National Academy of Sports Medicine, American Council on Exercise, and National Strength & Conditioning Association. Alan recently lectured to clinicians at the FDA and the annual conference of the Los Angeles Dietetic Association. He maintains a private practice designing programs for recreational, Olympic, and professional athletes, including the Los Angeles Lakers, Los Angeles Kings, and Anaheim Mighty Ducks. Alan is a contributing editor to Men's Health magazine, where he has a monthly column called "Ask The Weight Loss Coach".

Aragon is also a frequent contributor on forum.bodybuilding.com Why don't you bring your pro-dextrose argument over there?

Once people start paying you to get them in shape, once you start talking and listening to world class nutritionists then come back to me and tell me that I dont know what im talking about.

You've said 'world class' nutritionists on this and other posts about nutrition. I think you should stop since it just further cements the fact that you have little idea what you're talking about. There is no such thing as a 'world class' nutritionist. World class is a term reserved for identifying competitors from around world who come together to compete. There is no such competition for nutritionists.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 12 (view)
 
Tips for the you peeps!
Posted: 4/22/2009 6:45:19 AM

Sugar helps shutle protein faster into the blood stream.


Seriously Ironman, you really should spend some time researching nutrition from *reliable* sources.

You can start by learning the difference between dietary sugar and blood sugar as well as what produces and controls serum (blood) proteins.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 110 (view)
 
So Round So Firm & So Fully Packed! So whats the Problem!
Posted: 4/21/2009 4:20:05 PM

Heh! I jus' figure, karma being what it is, that the lucky thin ones with very active metabolisms who make the round, firm and fully packed miserable with their preaching, are due for a big surprise the next time around.


Any understanding of the true concept of Karma and you'd realize that you have just insured bad karma for yourself.

And most of the "lucky thin ones" - especially the ones who are 40+ - make their own luck via lifestyle choices. Metabolism is increased with increased muscle mass. Build more muscle and your metabolism goes up - no luck involved.

As for preaching, I assume you include the entire medical community with your statement?
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 56 (view)
 
STUPID HEALTH MYTHS !!
Posted: 4/11/2009 6:47:22 PM
Ironman,

Ever hear the phrase, "You can lead a horse to water..."?

How many times do people have to post that we take issue with your assertion that frequent meals changes metabolism? That's the issue. Your diatribes nonwithstanding, you still refuse to address THAT SPECIFIC ISSUE WITH PEER REVIEWED SCIENTIFIC STUDIES!!

I never said consuming 4000 calories in 2 meals is the same as consuming 4000 calories in 5 or 6 meals. Get it? What I said is that one's metabolism doesn't change regardless if they consume 4000 calories in 2 meals or 6 meals.

In all seriousness, you should stick to your promise not to post anymore in this thread. A person who finds himself in a hole should not keep digging.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 45 (view)
 
STUPID HEALTH MYTHS !!
Posted: 4/11/2009 8:42:59 AM
Ironman,

Every time you post you further perpetuate the stereotype that bodybuilders are all brawn and no brain. Seriously, stop posting about a subject you obviously haven't a full grasp on.

In a nutshell, you are claiming a cause-and-effect relationship that scientifically has not proved to be true.

Cēterīs paribus is a Latin terms that means, "all else being equal". Introducing bodybuilders into the equation when trying to prove your assertion that frequent meals boosts metabolism actually cripples your argument. Now, read slowly and open your mind for a minute and perhaps you'll actually understand the point being made by others.

Calories consumed > (greater than) calories expended (metabolism) = weight gain
Calories consumed < (less than) calories expended = weight loss

With me so far?

Now, if someone consumes 4000 calories in a day and only burns 3000 calories then that extra energy (calories = energy) is stored in the body and results in weight gain. The studies are pretty conclusive that it doesn't matter how you consume those 4000 calories in a day - whether it be 2 meals or 6 meals - at the end of the day the metabolism remains a constant 3000 calories burned (hypothetically speaking).

When you introduce bodybuilders into the equation you now upset the "all else being equal" rule that is the basic foundation for the validity of any study or experiment. No one here is arguing that eating frequent meals doesn't have its benefits. When speaking in terms of bodybuilders, eating frequent meals may very well aid in the building of muscle because of what is known as 'nutrient timing'. That is, delivering the proper nutrients at the time muscles are most receptive to repair and growth - which studies indicate is just prior, during, and right after strenuous loading of the muscles.

Will you at least agree that the more lean muscle mass one has the higher their resting metabolic rate (RMR)? It's a pretty well established fact that at rest, muscles burn more energy than fat. So, again using the "all else being equal" rule, let's take two people who both weigh 200 lbs. One of those two people has 30% body fat while the other has 10% body fat. It stands to reason then that the person with 10% body fat will have a higher metabolism and therefore can consume more calories in a day than the person with 30% body fat without gaining weight.

Still with me?

A bodybuilder trains by progressive overload and eats frequent meals containing the proper nutrition to deliver nutrients at the optimum time to build muscle. As muscle mass increases, so does metabolism. So in effect, it's not the frequent meals that raises metabolism, but the increase in muscle mass that increases metabolism.

In order to prove your assertion that frequent meals increases metabolism you would have to use completely sedentary people in the experiment in order to eliminate the role muscle mass plays in metabolism. In other words, your use of bodybuilders as an example invalidates your argument because you cannot say with certainty that eating frequent meals raises metabolism when it's an established fact that an increase in muscle mass raises metabolism. You must eliminate the variable that is the bodybuilder and conduct the experiment with two groups of sedentary people with similar body compositions. One group will consume a set number of calories in a day by eating 2 meals while the other group will consume the same number of calories by eating 5 or 6 meals. Then and only then can you prove or disprove - all else being equal - that eating frequent meals has a notable effect on metabolism.

No offense to your age, but if you took your argument to the 'Over 35' forum over at Bodybuilding.com you'd be virtually castrated over there. You also don't help your cause at all when you take shots at ~BP~ 's physique. Seriously dude, you and I know damn well there aren't many 46-year old women who have her body - so you're making yourself look pretty silly. Go to bodyspace.com and tell me there are many profiles of women 45+ who have better bodies. You want us to believe that there are lots of those women and they all train at your gym? Right.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 6 (view)
 
Weight loss mantras
Posted: 4/11/2009 4:42:23 AM
"If it tastes good...................









..................spit it out."
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 40 (view)
 
STUPID HEALTH MYTHS !!
Posted: 4/10/2009 3:04:00 PM
And really, do you seriously consider that a 61 yr. old woman who has spent her life playing all types of sports would be concerned about bulking up?


Sorry. LOL! That was a preemptive statement on my part. If I had $10 for every time a beginner stated in a post "I just want to tone up. I don't want to bulk up", I'd be retired living in the Abacos right now.

It's my humble opinion that any exercise regimen is lacking if it doesn't incorporate resistance training. People will all too often use the excuse that they fear becoming muscle-bound, not realizing that it takes an extreme and extraordinary amount of effort to look like a bodybuilder.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 39 (view)
 
STUPID HEALTH MYTHS !!
Posted: 4/10/2009 1:53:49 PM

The sad truth is that I, and people like me, will only get an effective metabolic boost through the use of chemicals, and most of us aren't really comfortable with their use or side effects.


Well, not quite true. Adding muscle mass through resistance training will boost resting metabolic rate - not to mention the energy burned while actually do the exercise.

And yes, even at 61 the body is quite capable of growing muscle through resistance training.

And no, you'll never have to worry about "bulking up". The idea is simply to change the body's composition so that more lean muscle mass exists.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 36 (view)
 
STUPID HEALTH MYTHS !!
Posted: 4/10/2009 12:15:34 PM


If you knew fitness and nutrition you would also know why person who eats 6 times a day is starving if they did not eat in 3 hours and you would know why person who only eats 2-3 times a day can go 5-6 hours without hunger. It all has to do with metabolism speed!


Since you keep talking in circles Ironman it looks like I'm going to have to take the ball over on your court.




From Lee Hayward's Total Fitness Bodybuilding Log: http://leehayward.blogspot.com/2009/03/do-frequent-meals-increase-your.html

Does eating frequent meals increase metabolism?
A lot of diet and nutrition experts recommend eating several smaller meals per day rather than eating the typical 3 square meals per day. The thinking behind this is that frequent feedings will help speed up the metabolism and burn more calories from the energy used to digest the food.

But does this really work in the real world?

There was a study done by Drs. M A Taylor and J S Garrow from King's College London UK (Int. J. Obesity 25: 519-528, 2001) that measured the energy expenditure from eating 6 meals per day vs. 2 meals per day. The test subjects ate the same number of total calories, but the first group ate that food in 6 small meals and the second group ate the same amount of food in 2 big meals.

The results of the study showed that there was No Difference in the energy expenditure from eating 6 meals per day or 2 meals per day. This goes to show that the key to losing weight (or gaining it) is the total caloric intake and not the meal frequency.

Now with that being said there is still some benefits to dividing up your food intake up over the course of the day because it is easier to digest and generally more comfortable on the stomach to eat lighter more frequent meals.

However, when it comes to sticking with a serious fat loss diet, one trick that I've used personally and have shared with several of my personal coaching students with great results, is once you are following a structured fat loss eating plan and you want to further reduce your caloric intake to create an even greater caloric deficit. Rather then cutting back on your portion sizes and eating smaller meals to the point where you have to eat a few bites of food and then leave the table hungry. Keep the meal size the same and just eat fewer meals.

When I start a pre-contest fat loss diet I'll begin with 6 meals per day, then cut back to 5 meals, then 4 meals, and for the last few weeks before a show I'll even drop down to just 3 meals per day. The meal size stays consistent and this allows me to leave the table comfortably full, but I'm creating a caloric deficit simply by eating fewer meals and less food over the course of the da.!
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 24 (view)
 
STUPID HEALTH MYTHS !!
Posted: 4/10/2009 7:26:19 AM
Ironman,

The entire argument for frequent meals raising metabolism is based on the thermal effect of food (TEF). Yes, every time you eat food it raises TEF - or metabolism if you will. However, the studies proving this have been grossly misinterpreted by people out to sell diet and exercise books.

The studies which people tend to ignore are the ones that show the at the end of the day, TOTAL TEF is no different whether you consume 4000 calories a day via many meals or you consume 4000 calories a day via 2 or 3 meals. In other words, overall - when measured over the entire day - metabolism remains constant and there is no difference in terms of fat storage.

Now, that said, there is emerging research - the most notable coming from Dr. John Ivy at the University of Texas - which appears to support the benefits of nutrient timing for building muscle mass and endurance. Ivy's research has shown that the most critical time for proper nutrient intake in order to build muscle occurs 30 minutes prior to exercise and 15 to 45 minutes after exercise.
From http://www.utexas.edu/features/archive/2004/nutrition.html:
According to Ivy, “nutrient timing” begins 30 minutes before exercise, when one should fully hydrate and raise blood glucose levels by consuming approximately 14-20 ounces of water or electrolyte solution. This delays the development of dehydration, hastens the onset of sweating and moderates the rise in body temperature.

During exercise, smart nutrition choices become even more important. In order to spare muscle glycogen, limit cortisol and free radical levels, prevent dehydration and set the stage for faster recovery after a workout, Ivy found that fluids should be replenished every 15 to 20 minutes, if possible.

In one study with cyclists, Ivy discovered that drinking a fluid containing carbohydrate and protein in a 4:1 ratio improved endurance 57 percent compared with water and 24 percent compared with a carbohydrate drink.

Because muscle breakdown occurs faster during exercise, consuming a supplement that includes protein while exercising gives muscles some of the protein they need to produce extra energy. The result is less muscle damage. Similarly, maintaining blood glucose levels by ingesting carbohydrates during exercise leads to less depletion of glycogen stores and less fatigue.

Wrapping up the metabolic window of opportunity around exercise is the very important 30 minutes following a workout. In fact, according to Ivy, this is the most important time for minding nutrition p’s and q’s.

In the 30 minutes following a workout, a muscle’s potential to rebuild peaks, and it is extremely sensitive to insulin. To take full advantage of the muscle rebuilding benefits that can occur in this golden window of opportunity, the right combination of nutrients, such as carbohydrate and high quality protein, should be consumed within 15 to 45 minutes after exercise.

Insulin sensitivity, and the ability of muscle fibers to pack in as much energy as possible, falls significantly one hour after exercise. After two hours, muscles not only lose their sensitivity but actually become insulin resistant and muscle breakdown occurs. Even though activity has stopped, the muscles continue to lose protein and nutrients without supplementation.


Yes, there are reasons why timing meals - which includes eating more frequently throughout the day - is better for building muscle mass and endurance. But BP and a couple of others are absolutely correct when they state that it's a MYTH that eating more meals verses fewer meals raises metabolism - IT DOESN'T.

Muscle mass raises metabolism. The more muscle you're able to build the higher your RMR. So let's establish the correct cause and effect relationship in terms of what raises metabolism and stop spreading this myth that won't diet which states that metabolism is raised by eating 5 or 6 meals a day. Again, IT'S A MYTH!!
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 52 (view)
 
Supplement and lifting help.
Posted: 4/6/2009 7:38:42 AM
See tricapunk's post.

Cables provide constant resistance through the entire range of motion. How do you not see the difference between that and holding a muscle in a contracted position? In one there is movement with tension at all points. In the other there is no movement with tension in one point. This is a pretty basic concept.


A basic concept apparent to you and tricapunk but a concept that is nevertheless inaccurate. It's also ironic that tricapunk fails to follow his own advice to stop posting here if one cannot grasp the concepts of muscle contraction and resistance.

Here, look it up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_contraction


From en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_contraction:

Muscle fiber generates tension through the action of actin and myosin cross-bridge cycling. While under tension, the muscle may lengthen, shorten or remain the same. Though the term 'contraction' implies shortening, when referring to the muscular system it means muscle fibers generating tension with the help of motor neurons (the terms twitch tension, twitch force and fiber contraction are also used).


Now, is it possible that a muscle isn't undergoing contraction during the tension phase of a particular resistance movement? Yes, it is possible; however that would mean the tension would have to be absorbed by tendons, ligaments, and bone structures in order to counter the resistance. Under that scenario, I think even you and tricapunk would agree that to be a dangerous and injury prone method of training.

As for pushups being a superior alternative to db flyes, you'll have to accept that I strongly disagree with you as my own experience has rendered your belief false.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 45 (view)
 
Supplement and lifting help.
Posted: 4/5/2009 9:06:26 AM
I'd personally rank pushups ahead of flies.
Apples and oranges - within the only commonality being they both work the chest. Now, if you wanted to rank pushups ahead of machine bench press then at least you'd be digging in the same bushel of apples.

First you state:
Holding a muscle in a contracted state doesn't do much other than build lactic acid.

Then you state that db flyes are inferior because:
cable crossover and even pec deck are safer and more efficient due to constant tension.

Care to explain why these aren't contradictory statements?
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 42 (view)
 
Supplement and lifting help.
Posted: 4/5/2009 4:55:38 AM

I personally feel that DB flies are worthless;


The credibility you gained on your earlier posts was quickly lost with this statement.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 11 (view)
 
Not eating after 8 pm question
Posted: 4/4/2009 5:06:48 AM
Why do overweight people who are trying to control their temptation keep food in the house? I never understood this. Would anyone in their right mind recommend that a recovering drug addict buy drugs and keep it within arms reach?

Of course I'm speaking to those who live alone.

Controlling one's appetite and what food they consume also extends to their shopping habits. If you don't buy it, you can't eat it. If you don't have it in the house you don't have to worry about eating after a certain time.

Convenience is as much a part of the problem as temptation and indulgence.

Long ago our ancestors had to hunt and gather to feed themselves. Is going to the grocery store on a daily basis to buy only what you need really that much of a sacrifice when your goal is to get to a healthy weight?
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Retinol for anti-aging?
Posted: 4/3/2009 7:49:14 AM
In lieu of prescription strength retinol, RALGA (a combination of retinaldehyde + glycolic acid) has been shown in a number of studies to be an effective OTC solution for acne, aging skin, and sun-damaged skin.

As far as I know, the strongest solution of a combination of these ingredients for over-the-counter purchase can only be found in the product Diacneal by Avene. A search on the product will produce the recommendation by many to attempt to secure a sample prior to making a full purchase in order to test your particular sensitivity to the strength (0.1% retinaldehyde, 6% glycolic acid).

Risking the metro-sexual accusations - which I'm actually ok with - I will tell you my own experience with Diacneal. I grew up in the Virgin Islands and have spent the majority of my life living there and in Florida. In other words, my skin has suffered from the effects of photo-aging. Prior to the use of Diacneal, I had three creases that ran uninterrupted across the length of my entire forehead. I've now been using the product for approximately 5 months and only 1 of those lines now remains across my entire forehead. The other 2 lines now only exist at each end of my forehead with the middle of the lines completely disappearing - even when I wrinkle my forehead by raising my eyebrows.

Disclaimer: I am in no way associated with Avene or any other skin product company. Your results may vary from mine so I urge you to consider my experience for whatever its worth - that of only 1 person.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 34 (view)
 
Supplement and lifting help.
Posted: 4/3/2009 7:03:44 AM
Can't argue with almost anything you've posted, but I'd like to comment on a couple of things you've stated.


Glucosamine has been proven time and again to do nothing. I know there are some studies floating around that claim it works but the preponderance of evidence at this point indicates that it doesn't work. And in fact according to this article (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/health/story/595864.html) "The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons now recommends against taking it."


I don't think it's accurate to say that glucosamine has been *proven* to do nothing. From the studies I've read I think it's a bit more accurate to say that glucosamine, or even glucosamine/chondroitin, has not been shown to repair joint damage. In terms of pain relief, the studies, at this time, still appear to be inconclusive. The quote you took from the Charlotte Observer, while accurately quoted from the article, does not appear on the AAOS website. The closest statement I could find on the AAOS website pertains to chondroitin and comes at the heels of the latest study to date on the supplement: "For patients with advanced osteoarthritis, a clinically relevant benefit is unlikely and the use of chondroitin should be discouraged.”

You also stated the following:
Furthermore, there is no advantage to going slower and in fact lifting quickly may be more anabolic. Holding a muscle in a contracted state doesn't do much other than build lactic acid.

Perhaps from a purely technical standpoint you may be correct, but slowing down the movement helps those who tend to use momentum to assist in the movement of the weight (one only has to look around in any gym to see how many people swing the weight on every rep) and slowing down the movement also helps people to establish the mind-muscle connection. So, depending on the skill level of someone who uses weights for resistance training, a recommendation to use slow controlled movements may prove to be very beneficial.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 14 (view)
 
Confession/Apology Letters from guys
Posted: 3/31/2009 12:28:28 PM
Apologies should never be conditional. They are remorse for an action that you regret. An apology offered only in the hopes that you will be forgiven is an empty apology.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 5 (view)
 
Getting your kids to eat the Healthy foods we make?
Posted: 3/31/2009 7:10:27 AM

By the way Jumbie and JBIII, I pick my battles with my kids. And food just isn't worth it.


I thought the role of the parent was to win all battles. But what do I know, I have no kids. You do, so carry on.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 3 (view)
 
Getting your kids to eat the Healthy foods we make?
Posted: 3/30/2009 2:59:28 PM

My parents had a great trick for this, They told me to eat it.


Sounds like your parents and my mother were somehow related.

I was never given a choice. I ate what was served and couldn't leave the table until it was finished. And if it was time to go to bed and the food was still sitting there, I'd find it on my plate the next day along with that day's food.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 9 (view)
 
I hate our Health Care System
Posted: 3/27/2009 7:03:46 AM
One of the hardest concepts to grasp is that life isn't fair; and moaning and whining about inequities in life won't get you anywhere.

Is it fair that some people can afford health care and others can't? No.
Is it fair that someone who sacrifices and works hard to get a good education and a well-paying job is taxed higher than someone who sits on their @ss all day with no motivation? No.
Is it fair that people who take care of their bodies through exercise and diet pay the same health care premiums as people who smoke and eat to excess? No.

Just how important is health care to you? Important enough to take the necessary steps to get a job where health benefits are provided? If you want affordable health care coverage, it's there. The question is, are you willing to do what's necessary to obtain it?
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 2 (view)
 
Food choices during stressing times
Posted: 3/25/2009 6:21:34 AM
Perhaps it's by nature's design that a species has an innate mechanism to self-destruct if it cannot thrive in its environment.
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 9 (view)
 
Trusting again
Posted: 3/22/2009 10:20:24 AM
Interesting.........I was 22 when I got married...How did you get I was 15?


What's interesting is how you can't figure out that we know you're either lying about your age or the length of your marriage.

You either have two choices:

a) Trust people until they give you a reason not to trust them
b) Don't trust people until they give you a reason to trust them

The question is, which choice will serve you better in life?
 Jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 10 (view)
 
What makes someone needy?
Posted: 3/20/2009 7:24:02 AM
A person should be able to do and care for themselves in all aspects of life. The list is almost inexhaustible but just to give you an idea:

A person should be able to:
- make themselves happy
- support themselves financially
- be motivated enough to arrive at self-actualization (Kurt Goldstein defines self-actualization as a driving life force that will ultimately lead to maximizing one's abilities and determine the path of one's life)

In other words, if you depend on others to provide for you what you are unable or unwilling to provide for yourself, then you are "too needy".
 jumbie564
Joined: 5/20/2008
Msg: 87 (view)
 
What is it with girls in their 20s
Posted: 3/16/2009 1:56:37 PM

I think nature is cruel to both men and women. Women are at the height of their physical attractiveness in their twenties.


It's not nature and there's nothing cruel about what happens to men and women as they age. People assume there's a cause-and-effect relationship between age and looks when the real culprit for the decline in appearance is neglect and abuse - plain and simple.

You drive a new car off the lot and for the first few years you can neglect maintenance and it won't show. Eventually though, without care and maitenance, that car's paint will fade, the engine will sputter, and the tires will go flat. By the same token, there are cars on the road that are 20+ years old and look as new as the day they left the factory.

A great deal of women in their 20's look good because enough years of neglect and abuse haven't accummulated to have a substantial effect. The same holds true for men. Conversely, there are some great looking women and men who are 40 and beyond who have taken exceptional care of themselves and they still have bodies that appear half the age of the typical person of the same age.

But it's a lot easier and certainly more comforting to believe that nature is the reason for the decline of our bodies, isn't it?
 
Show ALL Forums