Is Keto Worth it?
Replies
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Inspiration15 wrote: »I am CONSIDERING Keto. It seems so drastic to me. If you eat a cookie the weight will come back. Anyone successful on this? Was it hard?
Drastic to me means doing a WOE that leads from health to Type 2 Diabetes.
Keto has never been a weight loss program but a WOE for people fighting a premature death due to health failure from any causes.
Please stop making unsubstantiated medical claims.
What do you see as the least common denominator cause of premature death due due to health failure?
Simple, obesity, lack of exercise, smoking, family history (genetics), and drinking are the biggest factors. So if you are trying to prolong life, I hope you are in a healthy weight, exercise daily for 30 minutes or more a day, limit smoking and drinking, and if you really want to decrease risk, than almost limit processed foods. So the question is Gale, since you preach why you did Keto, how many of these do you also do?
Also, you should stop confusing treatment vs prevention. There is a significant difference between the two.
OP, the issue I have with keto (and luckily I only do it 4 days a week with 2 days of carb refeeds) is the lack of volume, it limits a ton of extremely healthy foods, and it limits a ton of variety.
And as some alluded to, it really comes down to what you can sustain. If you want, tailor down your carbs a bit to see what kind of restriction you have. And then slowly move to around 50g. In the end, if you find it difficult to hit those carb levels, than it's going to be very difficult to sustain.
The least common denominator in about 85% of premature death due to health failure first starts with failing mitochondria count and health. The way I move, eat and think are geared to increasing my quality and quantity of my brown fat.
siimland.com/ketosis-and-mitochondria/
"The Ketogenic Diet and Mitochondrial Density
Increasing mitochondrial density should fundamentally start with nutrition.
The ketogenic diet is the best one for mitochondria not only because of using fat for fuel but also because of its many protective aspects against oxidative stress.
Ketosis reduces the amount of epileptic seizures people get
Ketosis maintains healthy brain cells and prevents them from dying
Alzheimer’s is now referred to as type-3 diabetes or basically insulin resistance in the brain.
Mitochondrial dysfunction caused by oxidative stress is linked to aging, cancer, autism and many other diseases
The mitochondria are surrounded by a functional membrane which gets built by the fat you eat
Using ketone bodies for energy releases more acetyl-CoA, which then gets directed back to the Krebs Cycle to be produced for energy again."
If you are willing to take advice from an anthropologist, you are more than welcome to believe it. Also, if you want to increases your chances of living long (like statistically), start to exercise (a 1/4 mile walk isn't enough), lose a bit more weight since you are at the top end of acceptable, and stop eating McDonalds 3-4x a week.
[url="httphttps://www.honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://"]httphttps://honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://[/url]
Microbial residents, known as mitochondria, have become essential parts of our own biology.
Mitochondrial Disease plays a major role when it comes to serious health conditions, including aging. It’s unbelievable that up until the turn of the century, we knew little about the mitochondria, even though these tiny, peanut-shaped miniature organs (organelles) found at the center of our cells are responsible for fueling us with energy and dictating how vibrant and healthy we are. These organelles produce the energy we need for every single physical, mental, and emotional function.
How many times have we heard the phrase “it’s all in the genes?” It sounds cute as an offhand joke when, let’s say, a young child starts playing the same sport as their parent. However, a lifetime of hearing our relatives and medical caregivers tell us that our disease risk is “in the genes” is very disempowering and misleading.
A life is priceless, and the financial cost of chronic illness is staggering. Between 2012 to 2015, heart failure cost $108 billion, diabetes cost $1.5 trillion, and dementia an astounding $818 billion, worldwide. In the USA alone, cancer cost $135 billion.
People are dying from these diseases. There’s a belief that our genes dictate our health and longevity, but what if the true primary cause is something else? Something we have power over? As discussed by Nature Builds Health, “most disease actually starts in what is called ‘mitochondria’ … by improving your mitochondria function, you can even lower your chances for getting certain diseases”."
Maybe this source is more to your taste as you read about the newly found least common denominator in premature death in humans.
Not a scientific resource either, but thanks for playing.
Protip: if the site you link to is selling something (especially supplements) they can't be trusted as reliable.
This is for the ones wanting a scientific resource that many disease states occur due to one not knowing to focus on mitochondria health.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684129/
"Table 1
Partial List of Diseases Caused or Aggravated by Mitochondrial Dysfunction
Early aging
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Alzheimer’s disease
Autism
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic fatigue syndrome
Dementia
Diabetes
Huntington’s disease
Migraine headache
Parkinson’s disease"
"Table 4
Drugs That Damage Mitochondria
Acetaminophen
Antibiotics
Aspirin
AZT
Cocaine
Grisepfulvin
Indomethacin
Methamphetamine
l-DOPA
NSAIDs
Statins"
"Summary
There is so much more that could be written about mitochondria from the perspective of an integrative medicine clinician. I think we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg of the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in our patients’ disease and ill health. As the environment becomes more polluted and drug prescribing increases, this problem will become even worse. The good news is that there is a lot we can do to help."
Are you claiming keto cures huntington's disease?! If you have the gene you will 100% get it. Nothing to do with carbs at allsingingflutelady wrote: »
Are you claiming keto cures huntington's disease?! If you have the gene you will 100% get it. Nothing to do with carbs at allGaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Inspiration15 wrote: »I am CONSIDERING Keto. It seems so drastic to me. If you eat a cookie the weight will come back. Anyone successful on this? Was it hard?
Drastic to me means doing a WOE that leads from health to Type 2 Diabetes.
Keto has never been a weight loss program but a WOE for people fighting a premature death due to health failure from any causes.
Please stop making unsubstantiated medical claims.
What do you see as the least common denominator cause of premature death due due to health failure?
Simple, obesity, lack of exercise, smoking, family history (genetics), and drinking are the biggest factors. So if you are trying to prolong life, I hope you are in a healthy weight, exercise daily for 30 minutes or more a day, limit smoking and drinking, and if you really want to decrease risk, than almost limit processed foods. So the question is Gale, since you preach why you did Keto, how many of these do you also do?
Also, you should stop confusing treatment vs prevention. There is a significant difference between the two.
OP, the issue I have with keto (and luckily I only do it 4 days a week with 2 days of carb refeeds) is the lack of volume, it limits a ton of extremely healthy foods, and it limits a ton of variety.
And as some alluded to, it really comes down to what you can sustain. If you want, tailor down your carbs a bit to see what kind of restriction you have. And then slowly move to around 50g. In the end, if you find it difficult to hit those carb levels, than it's going to be very difficult to sustain.
The least common denominator in about 85% of premature death due to health failure first starts with failing mitochondria count and health. The way I move, eat and think are geared to increasing my quality and quantity of my brown fat.
siimland.com/ketosis-and-mitochondria/
"The Ketogenic Diet and Mitochondrial Density
Increasing mitochondrial density should fundamentally start with nutrition.
The ketogenic diet is the best one for mitochondria not only because of using fat for fuel but also because of its many protective aspects against oxidative stress.
Ketosis reduces the amount of epileptic seizures people get
Ketosis maintains healthy brain cells and prevents them from dying
Alzheimer’s is now referred to as type-3 diabetes or basically insulin resistance in the brain.
Mitochondrial dysfunction caused by oxidative stress is linked to aging, cancer, autism and many other diseases
The mitochondria are surrounded by a functional membrane which gets built by the fat you eat
Using ketone bodies for energy releases more acetyl-CoA, which then gets directed back to the Krebs Cycle to be produced for energy again."
If you are willing to take advice from an anthropologist, you are more than welcome to believe it. Also, if you want to increases your chances of living long (like statistically), start to exercise (a 1/4 mile walk isn't enough), lose a bit more weight since you are at the top end of acceptable, and stop eating McDonalds 3-4x a week.
[url="httphttps://www.honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://"]httphttps://honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://[/url]
Microbial residents, known as mitochondria, have become essential parts of our own biology.
Mitochondrial Disease plays a major role when it comes to serious health conditions, including aging. It’s unbelievable that up until the turn of the century, we knew little about the mitochondria, even though these tiny, peanut-shaped miniature organs (organelles) found at the center of our cells are responsible for fueling us with energy and dictating how vibrant and healthy we are. These organelles produce the energy we need for every single physical, mental, and emotional function.
How many times have we heard the phrase “it’s all in the genes?” It sounds cute as an offhand joke when, let’s say, a young child starts playing the same sport as their parent. However, a lifetime of hearing our relatives and medical caregivers tell us that our disease risk is “in the genes” is very disempowering and misleading.
A life is priceless, and the financial cost of chronic illness is staggering. Between 2012 to 2015, heart failure cost $108 billion, diabetes cost $1.5 trillion, and dementia an astounding $818 billion, worldwide. In the USA alone, cancer cost $135 billion.
People are dying from these diseases. There’s a belief that our genes dictate our health and longevity, but what if the true primary cause is something else? Something we have power over? As discussed by Nature Builds Health, “most disease actually starts in what is called ‘mitochondria’ … by improving your mitochondria function, you can even lower your chances for getting certain diseases”."
Maybe this source is more to your taste as you read about the newly found least common denominator in premature death in humans.
Not a scientific resource either, but thanks for playing.
Protip: if the site you link to is selling something (especially supplements) they can't be trusted as reliable.
This is for the ones wanting a scientific resource that many disease states occur due to one not knowing to focus on mitochondria health.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684129/
"Table 1
Partial List of Diseases Caused or Aggravated by Mitochondrial Dysfunction
Early aging
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Alzheimer’s disease
Autism
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic fatigue syndrome
Dementia
Diabetes
Huntington’s disease
Migraine headache
Parkinson’s disease"
"Table 4
Drugs That Damage Mitochondria
Acetaminophen
Antibiotics
Aspirin
AZT
Cocaine
Grisepfulvin
Indomethacin
Methamphetamine
l-DOPA
NSAIDs
Statins"
"Summary
There is so much more that could be written about mitochondria from the perspective of an integrative medicine clinician. I think we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg of the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in our patients’ disease and ill health. As the environment becomes more polluted and drug prescribing increases, this problem will become even worse. The good news is that there is a lot we can do to help."
Where did you even see the author mention Keto? I did not make any claims because I didn't write the piece.
Keto is the topic of this thread.
So either you believe that this article supports your earlier claim that keto somehow fights premature death from all causes, or you are just trolling and derailing.
Which is it?Why you think our genes dooms us? Have you heard of epigenetics yet?
Further proof that you don't understand what epigenetics is.
So you didn't read the whole linked article?
Did you?
9 -
If you have the Huntington's gene you will get it unless you die of something else first. No ifs, ands or buts. It is a very horrible disease.GaleHawkins wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Inspiration15 wrote: »I am CONSIDERING Keto. It seems so drastic to me. If you eat a cookie the weight will come back. Anyone successful on this? Was it hard?
Drastic to me means doing a WOE that leads from health to Type 2 Diabetes.
Keto has never been a weight loss program but a WOE for people fighting a premature death due to health failure from any causes.
Please stop making unsubstantiated medical claims.
What do you see as the least common denominator cause of premature death due due to health failure?
Simple, obesity, lack of exercise, smoking, family history (genetics), and drinking are the biggest factors. So if you are trying to prolong life, I hope you are in a healthy weight, exercise daily for 30 minutes or more a day, limit smoking and drinking, and if you really want to decrease risk, than almost limit processed foods. So the question is Gale, since you preach why you did Keto, how many of these do you also do?
Also, you should stop confusing treatment vs prevention. There is a significant difference between the two.
OP, the issue I have with keto (and luckily I only do it 4 days a week with 2 days of carb refeeds) is the lack of volume, it limits a ton of extremely healthy foods, and it limits a ton of variety.
And as some alluded to, it really comes down to what you can sustain. If you want, tailor down your carbs a bit to see what kind of restriction you have. And then slowly move to around 50g. In the end, if you find it difficult to hit those carb levels, than it's going to be very difficult to sustain.
The least common denominator in about 85% of premature death due to health failure first starts with failing mitochondria count and health. The way I move, eat and think are geared to increasing my quality and quantity of my brown fat.
siimland.com/ketosis-and-mitochondria/
"The Ketogenic Diet and Mitochondrial Density
Increasing mitochondrial density should fundamentally start with nutrition.
The ketogenic diet is the best one for mitochondria not only because of using fat for fuel but also because of its many protective aspects against oxidative stress.
Ketosis reduces the amount of epileptic seizures people get
Ketosis maintains healthy brain cells and prevents them from dying
Alzheimer’s is now referred to as type-3 diabetes or basically insulin resistance in the brain.
Mitochondrial dysfunction caused by oxidative stress is linked to aging, cancer, autism and many other diseases
The mitochondria are surrounded by a functional membrane which gets built by the fat you eat
Using ketone bodies for energy releases more acetyl-CoA, which then gets directed back to the Krebs Cycle to be produced for energy again."
If you are willing to take advice from an anthropologist, you are more than welcome to believe it. Also, if you want to increases your chances of living long (like statistically), start to exercise (a 1/4 mile walk isn't enough), lose a bit more weight since you are at the top end of acceptable, and stop eating McDonalds 3-4x a week.
[url="httphttps://www.honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://"]httphttps://honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://[/url]
Microbial residents, known as mitochondria, have become essential parts of our own biology.
Mitochondrial Disease plays a major role when it comes to serious health conditions, including aging. It’s unbelievable that up until the turn of the century, we knew little about the mitochondria, even though these tiny, peanut-shaped miniature organs (organelles) found at the center of our cells are responsible for fueling us with energy and dictating how vibrant and healthy we are. These organelles produce the energy we need for every single physical, mental, and emotional function.
How many times have we heard the phrase “it’s all in the genes?” It sounds cute as an offhand joke when, let’s say, a young child starts playing the same sport as their parent. However, a lifetime of hearing our relatives and medical caregivers tell us that our disease risk is “in the genes” is very disempowering and misleading.
A life is priceless, and the financial cost of chronic illness is staggering. Between 2012 to 2015, heart failure cost $108 billion, diabetes cost $1.5 trillion, and dementia an astounding $818 billion, worldwide. In the USA alone, cancer cost $135 billion.
People are dying from these diseases. There’s a belief that our genes dictate our health and longevity, but what if the true primary cause is something else? Something we have power over? As discussed by Nature Builds Health, “most disease actually starts in what is called ‘mitochondria’ … by improving your mitochondria function, you can even lower your chances for getting certain diseases”."
Maybe this source is more to your taste as you read about the newly found least common denominator in premature death in humans.
Not a scientific resource either, but thanks for playing.
Protip: if the site you link to is selling something (especially supplements) they can't be trusted as reliable.
This is for the ones wanting a scientific resource that many disease states occur due to one not knowing to focus on mitochondria health.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684129/
"Table 1
Partial List of Diseases Caused or Aggravated by Mitochondrial Dysfunction
Early aging
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Alzheimer’s disease
Autism
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic fatigue syndrome
Dementia
Diabetes
Huntington’s disease
Migraine headache
Parkinson’s disease"
"Table 4
Drugs That Damage Mitochondria
Acetaminophen
Antibiotics
Aspirin
AZT
Cocaine
Grisepfulvin
Indomethacin
Methamphetamine
l-DOPA
NSAIDs
Statins"
"Summary
There is so much more that could be written about mitochondria from the perspective of an integrative medicine clinician. I think we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg of the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in our patients’ disease and ill health. As the environment becomes more polluted and drug prescribing increases, this problem will become even worse. The good news is that there is a lot we can do to help."
Are you claiming keto cures huntington's disease?! If you have the gene you will 100% get it. Nothing to do with carbs at allsingingflutelady wrote: »
Are you claiming keto cures huntington's disease?! If you have the gene you will 100% get it. Nothing to do with carbs at allGaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Inspiration15 wrote: »I am CONSIDERING Keto. It seems so drastic to me. If you eat a cookie the weight will come back. Anyone successful on this? Was it hard?
Drastic to me means doing a WOE that leads from health to Type 2 Diabetes.
Keto has never been a weight loss program but a WOE for people fighting a premature death due to health failure from any causes.
Please stop making unsubstantiated medical claims.
What do you see as the least common denominator cause of premature death due due to health failure?
Simple, obesity, lack of exercise, smoking, family history (genetics), and drinking are the biggest factors. So if you are trying to prolong life, I hope you are in a healthy weight, exercise daily for 30 minutes or more a day, limit smoking and drinking, and if you really want to decrease risk, than almost limit processed foods. So the question is Gale, since you preach why you did Keto, how many of these do you also do?
Also, you should stop confusing treatment vs prevention. There is a significant difference between the two.
OP, the issue I have with keto (and luckily I only do it 4 days a week with 2 days of carb refeeds) is the lack of volume, it limits a ton of extremely healthy foods, and it limits a ton of variety.
And as some alluded to, it really comes down to what you can sustain. If you want, tailor down your carbs a bit to see what kind of restriction you have. And then slowly move to around 50g. In the end, if you find it difficult to hit those carb levels, than it's going to be very difficult to sustain.
The least common denominator in about 85% of premature death due to health failure first starts with failing mitochondria count and health. The way I move, eat and think are geared to increasing my quality and quantity of my brown fat.
siimland.com/ketosis-and-mitochondria/
"The Ketogenic Diet and Mitochondrial Density
Increasing mitochondrial density should fundamentally start with nutrition.
The ketogenic diet is the best one for mitochondria not only because of using fat for fuel but also because of its many protective aspects against oxidative stress.
Ketosis reduces the amount of epileptic seizures people get
Ketosis maintains healthy brain cells and prevents them from dying
Alzheimer’s is now referred to as type-3 diabetes or basically insulin resistance in the brain.
Mitochondrial dysfunction caused by oxidative stress is linked to aging, cancer, autism and many other diseases
The mitochondria are surrounded by a functional membrane which gets built by the fat you eat
Using ketone bodies for energy releases more acetyl-CoA, which then gets directed back to the Krebs Cycle to be produced for energy again."
If you are willing to take advice from an anthropologist, you are more than welcome to believe it. Also, if you want to increases your chances of living long (like statistically), start to exercise (a 1/4 mile walk isn't enough), lose a bit more weight since you are at the top end of acceptable, and stop eating McDonalds 3-4x a week.
[url="httphttps://www.honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://"]httphttps://honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://[/url]
Microbial residents, known as mitochondria, have become essential parts of our own biology.
Mitochondrial Disease plays a major role when it comes to serious health conditions, including aging. It’s unbelievable that up until the turn of the century, we knew little about the mitochondria, even though these tiny, peanut-shaped miniature organs (organelles) found at the center of our cells are responsible for fueling us with energy and dictating how vibrant and healthy we are. These organelles produce the energy we need for every single physical, mental, and emotional function.
How many times have we heard the phrase “it’s all in the genes?” It sounds cute as an offhand joke when, let’s say, a young child starts playing the same sport as their parent. However, a lifetime of hearing our relatives and medical caregivers tell us that our disease risk is “in the genes” is very disempowering and misleading.
A life is priceless, and the financial cost of chronic illness is staggering. Between 2012 to 2015, heart failure cost $108 billion, diabetes cost $1.5 trillion, and dementia an astounding $818 billion, worldwide. In the USA alone, cancer cost $135 billion.
People are dying from these diseases. There’s a belief that our genes dictate our health and longevity, but what if the true primary cause is something else? Something we have power over? As discussed by Nature Builds Health, “most disease actually starts in what is called ‘mitochondria’ … by improving your mitochondria function, you can even lower your chances for getting certain diseases”."
Maybe this source is more to your taste as you read about the newly found least common denominator in premature death in humans.
Not a scientific resource either, but thanks for playing.
Protip: if the site you link to is selling something (especially supplements) they can't be trusted as reliable.
This is for the ones wanting a scientific resource that many disease states occur due to one not knowing to focus on mitochondria health.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684129/
"Table 1
Partial List of Diseases Caused or Aggravated by Mitochondrial Dysfunction
Early aging
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Alzheimer’s disease
Autism
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic fatigue syndrome
Dementia
Diabetes
Huntington’s disease
Migraine headache
Parkinson’s disease"
"Table 4
Drugs That Damage Mitochondria
Acetaminophen
Antibiotics
Aspirin
AZT
Cocaine
Grisepfulvin
Indomethacin
Methamphetamine
l-DOPA
NSAIDs
Statins"
"Summary
There is so much more that could be written about mitochondria from the perspective of an integrative medicine clinician. I think we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg of the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in our patients’ disease and ill health. As the environment becomes more polluted and drug prescribing increases, this problem will become even worse. The good news is that there is a lot we can do to help."
Where did you even see the author mention Keto? I did not make any claims because I didn't write the piece.
Why you think our genes dooms us? Have you heard of epigenetics yet?
6 -
"Assessing Mitochondrial Function
At this time, there are no clinically available tests to directly measure mitochondrial ATP production. However, as several procedures are now being used in research laboratories, I think it is only a matter of time until 1 or more become commercially available. (Two years ago, I worked with a lab to try to make such a test available, but technical challenges resulted in it not being cost effective and the results not adequately reliable.)
Fortunately, there are clinical assessment and indirect laboratory tests. Figure 4 shows the probability of mitochondrial dysfunction in various signs, symptoms, and diseases. There are several indirect measures of mitochondrial dysfunction.12 Most readily available are blood levels of lactate and pyruvate. However, these tests are quite susceptible to sampling error, recent exercise, and so forth, and they will only become abnormal when the mitochondrial dysfunction is so bad that anaerobic metabolism has to compensate. Urinary organic acid analysis can be quite useful for determining enzyme dysfunction in the citric acid cycle, which can pinpoint where the problem is. Finally, the amount of damage to the mtDNA can be estimated by 8-OHdG in the urine. Interestingly, this test also predicts cancer risk—not the type of cancer but rather the amount of DNA damage, which leads to cancer.13
An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc. Object name is 8-15f4.jpg
Figure 4
Probability of Mitochondrial Dysfunction in Common Signs, Symptoms, and Diseases14
Go to:
Strategies to Improve Mitochondrial Function
Pick the right mother. Sorry, couldn’t resist, but starting out with optimal mtDNA certainly helps.
Optimize nutrient status to limit oxygen and high-energy electron leakage in the ETC. As the greatest source of oxidative stress and damage to mtDNA, this is perhaps the most powerful antiaging strategy we can provide our patients.
Decrease toxin exposure. This is obviously true for virtually every disease, but because of the huge metabolic activity of the mitochondria, they are especially susceptible.
Provide nutrients that protect the mitochondria from oxidative stress.
Utilize nutrients that facilitate mitochondrial ATP production.
Build muscle mass. Even those with mitochondrial damage, such as that found in Parkinson’s disease, can increase ATP production through strength training.15"
"Yes, conventional medicine’s standardization of disease, disease diagnosis, and disease treatment has facilitated critical advances in many areas. Unfortunately, this perspective has also greatly impaired recognizing the uniqueness of the patient who “has the disease” and has led to the symptomatic treatment—at the expense of curative care. This is at the heart of the health care crisis."
Yes, stop breathing and living in an O2 rich environment for some non-measurable mitochondrial enhancement. If this last paragraph doesn't scream quack, I don't know how to make it more obvious.
13 -
singingflutelady wrote: »
If you have the Huntington's gene you will get it unless you die of something else first. No ifs, ands or buts. It is a very horrible disease.GaleHawkins wrote: »singingflutelady wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Inspiration15 wrote: »I am CONSIDERING Keto. It seems so drastic to me. If you eat a cookie the weight will come back. Anyone successful on this? Was it hard?
Drastic to me means doing a WOE that leads from health to Type 2 Diabetes.
Keto has never been a weight loss program but a WOE for people fighting a premature death due to health failure from any causes.
Please stop making unsubstantiated medical claims.
What do you see as the least common denominator cause of premature death due due to health failure?
Simple, obesity, lack of exercise, smoking, family history (genetics), and drinking are the biggest factors. So if you are trying to prolong life, I hope you are in a healthy weight, exercise daily for 30 minutes or more a day, limit smoking and drinking, and if you really want to decrease risk, than almost limit processed foods. So the question is Gale, since you preach why you did Keto, how many of these do you also do?
Also, you should stop confusing treatment vs prevention. There is a significant difference between the two.
OP, the issue I have with keto (and luckily I only do it 4 days a week with 2 days of carb refeeds) is the lack of volume, it limits a ton of extremely healthy foods, and it limits a ton of variety.
And as some alluded to, it really comes down to what you can sustain. If you want, tailor down your carbs a bit to see what kind of restriction you have. And then slowly move to around 50g. In the end, if you find it difficult to hit those carb levels, than it's going to be very difficult to sustain.
The least common denominator in about 85% of premature death due to health failure first starts with failing mitochondria count and health. The way I move, eat and think are geared to increasing my quality and quantity of my brown fat.
siimland.com/ketosis-and-mitochondria/
"The Ketogenic Diet and Mitochondrial Density
Increasing mitochondrial density should fundamentally start with nutrition.
The ketogenic diet is the best one for mitochondria not only because of using fat for fuel but also because of its many protective aspects against oxidative stress.
Ketosis reduces the amount of epileptic seizures people get
Ketosis maintains healthy brain cells and prevents them from dying
Alzheimer’s is now referred to as type-3 diabetes or basically insulin resistance in the brain.
Mitochondrial dysfunction caused by oxidative stress is linked to aging, cancer, autism and many other diseases
The mitochondria are surrounded by a functional membrane which gets built by the fat you eat
Using ketone bodies for energy releases more acetyl-CoA, which then gets directed back to the Krebs Cycle to be produced for energy again."
If you are willing to take advice from an anthropologist, you are more than welcome to believe it. Also, if you want to increases your chances of living long (like statistically), start to exercise (a 1/4 mile walk isn't enough), lose a bit more weight since you are at the top end of acceptable, and stop eating McDonalds 3-4x a week.
[url="httphttps://www.honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://"]httphttps://honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://[/url]
Microbial residents, known as mitochondria, have become essential parts of our own biology.
Mitochondrial Disease plays a major role when it comes to serious health conditions, including aging. It’s unbelievable that up until the turn of the century, we knew little about the mitochondria, even though these tiny, peanut-shaped miniature organs (organelles) found at the center of our cells are responsible for fueling us with energy and dictating how vibrant and healthy we are. These organelles produce the energy we need for every single physical, mental, and emotional function.
How many times have we heard the phrase “it’s all in the genes?” It sounds cute as an offhand joke when, let’s say, a young child starts playing the same sport as their parent. However, a lifetime of hearing our relatives and medical caregivers tell us that our disease risk is “in the genes” is very disempowering and misleading.
A life is priceless, and the financial cost of chronic illness is staggering. Between 2012 to 2015, heart failure cost $108 billion, diabetes cost $1.5 trillion, and dementia an astounding $818 billion, worldwide. In the USA alone, cancer cost $135 billion.
People are dying from these diseases. There’s a belief that our genes dictate our health and longevity, but what if the true primary cause is something else? Something we have power over? As discussed by Nature Builds Health, “most disease actually starts in what is called ‘mitochondria’ … by improving your mitochondria function, you can even lower your chances for getting certain diseases”."
Maybe this source is more to your taste as you read about the newly found least common denominator in premature death in humans.
Not a scientific resource either, but thanks for playing.
Protip: if the site you link to is selling something (especially supplements) they can't be trusted as reliable.
This is for the ones wanting a scientific resource that many disease states occur due to one not knowing to focus on mitochondria health.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684129/
"Table 1
Partial List of Diseases Caused or Aggravated by Mitochondrial Dysfunction
Early aging
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Alzheimer’s disease
Autism
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic fatigue syndrome
Dementia
Diabetes
Huntington’s disease
Migraine headache
Parkinson’s disease"
"Table 4
Drugs That Damage Mitochondria
Acetaminophen
Antibiotics
Aspirin
AZT
Cocaine
Grisepfulvin
Indomethacin
Methamphetamine
l-DOPA
NSAIDs
Statins"
"Summary
There is so much more that could be written about mitochondria from the perspective of an integrative medicine clinician. I think we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg of the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in our patients’ disease and ill health. As the environment becomes more polluted and drug prescribing increases, this problem will become even worse. The good news is that there is a lot we can do to help."
Are you claiming keto cures huntington's disease?! If you have the gene you will 100% get it. Nothing to do with carbs at allsingingflutelady wrote: »
Are you claiming keto cures huntington's disease?! If you have the gene you will 100% get it. Nothing to do with carbs at allGaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »johnslater461 wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Inspiration15 wrote: »I am CONSIDERING Keto. It seems so drastic to me. If you eat a cookie the weight will come back. Anyone successful on this? Was it hard?
Drastic to me means doing a WOE that leads from health to Type 2 Diabetes.
Keto has never been a weight loss program but a WOE for people fighting a premature death due to health failure from any causes.
Please stop making unsubstantiated medical claims.
What do you see as the least common denominator cause of premature death due due to health failure?
Simple, obesity, lack of exercise, smoking, family history (genetics), and drinking are the biggest factors. So if you are trying to prolong life, I hope you are in a healthy weight, exercise daily for 30 minutes or more a day, limit smoking and drinking, and if you really want to decrease risk, than almost limit processed foods. So the question is Gale, since you preach why you did Keto, how many of these do you also do?
Also, you should stop confusing treatment vs prevention. There is a significant difference between the two.
OP, the issue I have with keto (and luckily I only do it 4 days a week with 2 days of carb refeeds) is the lack of volume, it limits a ton of extremely healthy foods, and it limits a ton of variety.
And as some alluded to, it really comes down to what you can sustain. If you want, tailor down your carbs a bit to see what kind of restriction you have. And then slowly move to around 50g. In the end, if you find it difficult to hit those carb levels, than it's going to be very difficult to sustain.
The least common denominator in about 85% of premature death due to health failure first starts with failing mitochondria count and health. The way I move, eat and think are geared to increasing my quality and quantity of my brown fat.
siimland.com/ketosis-and-mitochondria/
"The Ketogenic Diet and Mitochondrial Density
Increasing mitochondrial density should fundamentally start with nutrition.
The ketogenic diet is the best one for mitochondria not only because of using fat for fuel but also because of its many protective aspects against oxidative stress.
Ketosis reduces the amount of epileptic seizures people get
Ketosis maintains healthy brain cells and prevents them from dying
Alzheimer’s is now referred to as type-3 diabetes or basically insulin resistance in the brain.
Mitochondrial dysfunction caused by oxidative stress is linked to aging, cancer, autism and many other diseases
The mitochondria are surrounded by a functional membrane which gets built by the fat you eat
Using ketone bodies for energy releases more acetyl-CoA, which then gets directed back to the Krebs Cycle to be produced for energy again."
If you are willing to take advice from an anthropologist, you are more than welcome to believe it. Also, if you want to increases your chances of living long (like statistically), start to exercise (a 1/4 mile walk isn't enough), lose a bit more weight since you are at the top end of acceptable, and stop eating McDonalds 3-4x a week.
[url="httphttps://www.honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://"]httphttps://honeycolony.com/article/mitochondrial-disease-its-not-your-genes-that-determine-your-fate/://[/url]
Microbial residents, known as mitochondria, have become essential parts of our own biology.
Mitochondrial Disease plays a major role when it comes to serious health conditions, including aging. It’s unbelievable that up until the turn of the century, we knew little about the mitochondria, even though these tiny, peanut-shaped miniature organs (organelles) found at the center of our cells are responsible for fueling us with energy and dictating how vibrant and healthy we are. These organelles produce the energy we need for every single physical, mental, and emotional function.
How many times have we heard the phrase “it’s all in the genes?” It sounds cute as an offhand joke when, let’s say, a young child starts playing the same sport as their parent. However, a lifetime of hearing our relatives and medical caregivers tell us that our disease risk is “in the genes” is very disempowering and misleading.
A life is priceless, and the financial cost of chronic illness is staggering. Between 2012 to 2015, heart failure cost $108 billion, diabetes cost $1.5 trillion, and dementia an astounding $818 billion, worldwide. In the USA alone, cancer cost $135 billion.
People are dying from these diseases. There’s a belief that our genes dictate our health and longevity, but what if the true primary cause is something else? Something we have power over? As discussed by Nature Builds Health, “most disease actually starts in what is called ‘mitochondria’ … by improving your mitochondria function, you can even lower your chances for getting certain diseases”."
Maybe this source is more to your taste as you read about the newly found least common denominator in premature death in humans.
Not a scientific resource either, but thanks for playing.
Protip: if the site you link to is selling something (especially supplements) they can't be trusted as reliable.
This is for the ones wanting a scientific resource that many disease states occur due to one not knowing to focus on mitochondria health.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684129/
"Table 1
Partial List of Diseases Caused or Aggravated by Mitochondrial Dysfunction
Early aging
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
Alzheimer’s disease
Autism
Cardiovascular disease
Chronic fatigue syndrome
Dementia
Diabetes
Huntington’s disease
Migraine headache
Parkinson’s disease"
"Table 4
Drugs That Damage Mitochondria
Acetaminophen
Antibiotics
Aspirin
AZT
Cocaine
Grisepfulvin
Indomethacin
Methamphetamine
l-DOPA
NSAIDs
Statins"
"Summary
There is so much more that could be written about mitochondria from the perspective of an integrative medicine clinician. I think we are seeing only the tip of the iceberg of the role of mitochondrial dysfunction in our patients’ disease and ill health. As the environment becomes more polluted and drug prescribing increases, this problem will become even worse. The good news is that there is a lot we can do to help."
Where did you even see the author mention Keto? I did not make any claims because I didn't write the piece.
Why you think our genes dooms us? Have you heard of epigenetics yet?
https://raredr.com/news/new-therapies-on-the-horizon-for-huntingtons-disease
Thanks for sharing about your health and thankfully the research sounds promising from this report.
https://mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/huntingtons-disease/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20356122
This is one website I use all the time.
I will try to see if I can learn more about the connection with mitochondria health mentioned in the link I posted the other day for validity one way or the other.
Best of success. I know my fear of passing the HLA-B27 factor to my kids delayed us having kids only to both come out testing positive. This is the main factor in me changing my way of eating to give them hope vs watching my health fail more every year. Keto is worth it to me because while it does not change my genetics it does seem to have a potential to help from the epigenetic angle perhaps. With AS having this genetic factor gives on about a 20% risk developing. While living on ketones vs. glucose is awesome in my case and disease it is not a cure all for all health issues that can develop.11 -
I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!14 -
I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
I am sorry that you feel actual data is not important and that making claims based on feels is sufficient to lead others on. Its exactly that mentality that gets beginners to follow poor lifting programs and have insufficient nutrients... And they wonder why many noobs struggle to see the results that you have gotten.
Evidence > anecdotal evidence
In the absence of evidence, anecdotes and experience can be beneficial, but when there is evidence over anecdotes, it should be used.
13 -
I'm on day 11 of keto and I feel GREAT! The first week was rough with cravings but haven't slipped up once. Down 9lbs. You urinate a TON but your flushing your body with water (I do crystal light, hate water).2
-
I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
Experience is great for telling someone how you applied the science to your situation. Your personal experiences should not take the place of the science.11 -
If you stick to it yes it as soon as you eat carbs you gain it all back. It helped me learn different foods to eat lower in carbs now I'm just balancing my carbs throughout the day and it has been working6
-
If you stick to it yes it as soon as you eat carbs you gain it all back. It helped me learn different foods to eat lower in carbs now I'm just balancing my carbs throughout the day and it has been working
Once you reintroduce carbs there typically is a slight (couple pounds) increase due to water and glycogen. If you regain all of the lost weight, It's because you are overconsuming calories.13 -
I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
Best of continued success.12 -
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
10 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.7 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.10 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.7 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.8 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.
And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.
12 -
I'm unable to recall the person's involved here in the UK, they were interviewed recently, not that long ago. Having lived with the NHS concept of living with diabetes one diabetic became fed up with their lot and decided to try to improve their quality of life for themselves. Flying in the face of the then NHS recommended dietary the person went low carb, within months their doctor was so impressed by their being off medication the concept was suggested to others on the practice list to see if the concept could work for them, it did. The story made it on to lunch time news! This is an example of N=1 making a difference. Its now common practice for many diabetics to move to keto, very low carb or fewer than regularly advised amount of carbs.
Its fine for those of you who still have the benefit of very good health, a fully functioning body for whom weight loss is still easy, to consume all the carbs and whatever you wish but please permit those for whom life has dealt a harsher future to share the knowledge they have acquired. After all, no one interested in achieving health is going to live and eat in ways which are going to adversely effect their quality of life, its just not how homo-sapiens work. We generally resist the self destruct button.14 -
I'm unable to recall the person's involved here in the UK, they were interviewed recently, not that long ago. Having lived with the NHS concept of living with diabetes one diabetic became fed up with their lot and decided to try to improve their quality of life for themselves. Flying in the face of the then NHS recommended dietary the person went low carb, within months their doctor was so impressed by their being off medication the concept was suggested to others on the practice list to see if the concept could work for them, it did. The story made it on to lunch time news! This is an example of N=1 making a difference. Its now common practice for many diabetics to move to keto, very low carb or fewer than regularly advised amount of carbs.
Its fine for those of you who still have the benefit of very good health, a fully functioning body for whom weight loss is still easy, to consume all the carbs and whatever you wish but please permit those for whom life has dealt a harsher future to share the knowledge they have acquired. After all, no one interested in achieving health is going to live and eat in ways which are going to adversely effect their quality of life, its just not how homo-sapiens work. We generally resist the self destruct button.
Science has known that eating low carb helps lower blood sugar for a very long while. It isn't something magical that popped up recently and started curing diseases left and right (although the media makes it seem like it). There are conditions where lowering carbs (or fat, or protein) is beneficial. OP's question is simple: is keto worth it for weight loss, as in, does it produce better weight loss results? The answer is always "just like any diet, yes and no. Yes if it's more sustainable, no if it isn't".10 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
No, it means you don't understand statistics (power)
8 -
WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.
And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.
My n=1 results that reduces my risks of a premature death TRUMPS general population scientific evidence if the general population results are not the same as my n=1 results that continues to improve my health markers over time.
7 -
Keto_Vampire wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
No, it means you don't understand statistics (power)
I do not think you understand when I comes to improving my health markers the averages of the human population results do not trump my n=1 results. If they sync up with general population statistics so be it and if not so be it.
Statistics is the best tool out there to twist the facts in the desired direction of the one paying the bill for the research. In undergrad school I did have a senior level Statistics Analysis class taught by the department head. He went over the BS associated with the field of statistics in general and how it can be a suckers game.
9 -
Trouble with n=1, is the confirmation bias, conflation of correlational factors, myopic interpretation of findings, etc...7
-
nutmegoreo wrote: »Trouble with n=1, is the confirmation bias, conflation of correlational factors, myopic interpretation of findings, etc...
Which is repeated ad naseum.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.
And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.
My n=1 results that reduces my risks of a premature death TRUMPS general population scientific evidence if the general population results are not the same as my n=1 results that continues to improve my health markers over time.
You have no independent confirmation or basis for comparison, so your results are absolutely meaningless.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.
And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.
My n=1 results that reduces my risks of a premature death TRUMPS general population scientific evidence if the general population results are not the same as my n=1 results that continues to improve my health markers over time.
The point you are missing is, you can’t be sure that it was your way of eating that caused the improved health markers, and not simply weight loss.5 -
WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.
And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.
My n=1 results that reduces my risks of a premature death TRUMPS general population scientific evidence if the general population results are not the same as my n=1 results that continues to improve my health markers over time.
The point you are missing is, you can’t be sure that it was your way of eating that caused the improved health markers, and not simply weight loss.
Or spontaneous remission4 -
WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.
And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.
My n=1 results that reduces my risks of a premature death TRUMPS general population scientific evidence if the general population results are not the same as my n=1 results that continues to improve my health markers over time.
The point you are missing is, you can’t be sure that it was your way of eating that caused the improved health markers, and not simply weight loss.
Exactly. Anyone who really understood science would realise that n=1 is invalid, for many reasons, but especially because correlation does not always equal causation. Especially when your n=1 is going by 'feels' alone.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »
FIFY. Personal validity =/= medical validity. Apples, oranges.GaleHawkins wrote: »I have no means of measuring except I feel and see the difference, when I flex, my shape and overall bulk after a 15 pound loss, and I have done this many times before. But It may be I have only put 1 pound on because I havent been doing any heavy leg work. If so, that pound has gone a long way.
Its not just CNS strength gain. I cant quantify how much I think is strength gain, but its no where near as much as the muscle size gain. Perhaps too, because I know what exercises give me personally, the fastest gains, and the reps/sets/ etc to maximise that for me, that helps gain fast.
But the CNS is a really good topic, because it has a huge bearing on how effectively we recuperate from training. Cheers
I am sorry, but "feels" =/= actual results. You are making an assumption rather than making a statement based on actual data. Is there potential that you did gain some muscle? Maybe. But you don't have data to support your actual position. You have no clue if it was muscle gains, increase in blood flow (make you look pump), fat loss, muscle loss, etc...
I am glad you like what you see and have accomplished, but that in no way means you have data to support your position.
Thats the problem here on this forum. You have to have data, proof, verification. Experience means nothing! What you see in the mirror, its subjective, weights in the gym going up, oh just nervous energy, bigger biceps, oh thats easy...pump. I cant believe this. Ive been training for 45 years, 4 years as a competitive bodybuilder and you learn alot doing that. I have way more than just a "clue". You can have your science and data, I'll keep my results!
@Grambo54 you make valid points. I love science and data but in my life ONLY my n=1 has any personal medical validity. When old with failing health waiting 50 years for science and data to evolve is a death sentence.
I changed it from personal to medical to be more scientifically correct.
Which shows you've entirely missed the point. Finding something personally valid does not automatically make it medically/scientifically valid.
Finding something personally valid Does automatically make it medically and scientifically valid in n=1 trials.
I guess that depends entirely on what your definition of valid is. My n=1 that the earth is flat does not make it so.
Valid = improved health markers in my life.
And many people experience similar improvements in health markers simply from losing weight. This is why the n=1 doesn’t trump direct scientific evidence.
My n=1 results that reduces my risks of a premature death TRUMPS general population scientific evidence if the general population results are not the same as my n=1 results that continues to improve my health markers over time.
The average life expectency is 78.7, you have no clue if you have mitigated those risk and probably wont' for another 15 years.7
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 430 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions