EPTTL Health and Fitness Initiative 2011 - Page 412
| Forum Index > Sports |
|
xJupiter9x
United States150 Posts
| ||
|
Dalguno
United States2446 Posts
 | ||
|
Lemonayd
United States745 Posts
| ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
Good for those of us at computers a lot :p | ||
|
Mithrandir
United States99 Posts
On July 03 2011 11:10 eshlow wrote: I randomly looked at one of the comments and I died inside a little "Also eating a high carbohydrate diet, without fat, does seem to have some benefit, especially in improving insulin sensitivity. One theory of insulin resistance is that fat in the bloodstream is what prevents sugars form being absorbed and this is a cause of IR. Still some diabetics do great on a lower carb diet, some do great on a dean ornish lower fat diet" Srsly? There is a grain of truth in there though. High fat very low carb diets lead to higher levels of blood fatty acids which make your insulin sensitivity worse. Of course it's not that simple though and if the alternative to a ketogenic diet is soda and pizza obviously there will be improvements if you switch. But it's safe to say the person who originally wrote that is a complete idiot. | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On July 03 2011 12:58 Mithrandir wrote: There is a grain of truth in there though. High fat very low carb diets lead to higher levels of blood fatty acids which make your insulin sensitivity worse. Of course it's not that simple though and if the alternative to a ketogenic diet is soda and pizza obviously there will be improvements if you switch. But it's safe to say the person who originally wrote that is a complete idiot. No. High carb diets lead to greater levels of blood triglyercides and decreased insulin sensitivity. Fructose, for example, is directly shunted to the liver and made into triglycerides (via de novo lipogenesis) and shipped out into the bloodstream for storage. See non-alcohol fatty liver disease for more details. | ||
|
Mithrandir
United States99 Posts
On July 03 2011 13:15 eshlow wrote: No. High carb diets lead to greater levels of blood triglyercides and decreased insulin sensitivity. Fructose, for example, is directly shunted to the liver and made into triglycerides (via de novo lipogenesis) and shipped out into the bloodstream for storage. See non-alcohol fatty liver disease for more details. Sigh... Go read what I said more carefully. | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
On July 03 2011 13:26 Mithrandir wrote: Sigh... Go read what I said more carefully. I did. There is a reason ketogenic diet reverses diabetes, and it's because it helps reverse all of the risk factors of metabolic disease and increase insulin sensitivity. Post prandial lipids are raised but then revert to normal or decreased status as the triglycerides are consumed for energy. Western high carbohydrate diets contribute to hyperlipidemia in the first place. | ||
|
RosaParksStoleMySeat
Japan926 Posts
On July 03 2011 13:26 Mithrandir wrote: Sigh... Go read what I said more carefully. I'd like to just confirm what you're saying... Are you saying that high fatty acids in the blood = "worse insulin sensitivity," and in your view that is a bad thing, right? This is pretty ambiguous because "worse" can mean "lower"--what we DON'T want, or "higher"--what we do want. It depends on how you interpret the term in this case. Are you sure you're not confusing low insulin sensitivity (bad) with high insulin sensitivity (good)? | ||
|
Mithrandir
United States99 Posts
On July 03 2011 13:36 RosaParksStoleMySeat wrote: I'd like to just confirm what you're saying... Are you saying that high fatty acids in the blood = "worse insulin sensitivity," and in your view that is a bad thing, right? This is pretty ambiguous because "worse" can mean "lower"--what we DON'T want, or "higher"--what we do want. It depends on how you interpret the term in this case. Are you sure you're not confusing low insulin sensitivity (bad) with high insulin sensitivity (good)? I am saying that in a healthy person switching to a very high fat low carb diet will worsen insulin sensitivity. That is, they will become less insulin sensitive. It makes sense intuitively. You need insulin, in large part, to shuttle carbohydrates out of the blood stream. If you're not ingesting carbohydrates, you don't want insulin to be as active. And yes I realize insulin is released in response to ingesting carbohydrates but there is also a basal level. Anyway, it's just an interesting fact. Believe me or don't believe me but I don't feel like debating it either way. And Eshlow seems to be misunderstanding me, again. | ||
|
phyre112
United States3090 Posts
On July 03 2011 13:51 Mithrandir wrote: I am saying that in a healthy person switching to a very high fat low carb diet will worsen insulin sensitivity. That is, they will become less insulin sensitive. It makes sense intuitively. You need insulin, in large part, to shuttle carbohydrates out of the blood stream. If you're not ingesting carbohydrates, you don't want insulin to be as active. And yes I realize insulin is released in response to ingesting carbohydrates but there is also a basal level. Anyway, it's just an interesting fact. Believe me or don't believe me but I don't feel like debating it either way. And Eshlow seems to be misunderstanding me, again. He's not misunderstanding, he's telling you that you're wrong. Do you have any kind of sources to back up what you're saying? | ||
|
eshlow
United States5210 Posts
We've pretty much all seen the studies where ketogenic diet / paleo / higher fat diets reverses obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease profiles. Hey wait I'll even give some more. http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/89/6/2717.abstract http://www.annals.org/content/140/10/769.short Oh wait, the first link above says "however, only the LC group had a significant decrease in circulating insulin concentrations." That's directly contradictory to what you stated two posts above me. I am saying that in a healthy person switching to a very high fat low carb diet will worsen insulin sensitivity. That is, they will become less insulin sensitive. It makes sense intuitively. You need insulin, in large part, to shuttle carbohydrates out of the blood stream. If you're not ingesting carbohydrates, you don't want insulin to be as active. And yes I realize insulin is released in response to ingesting carbohydrates but there is also a basal level. I am not misunderstanding you. I am saying you're pretty much wrong... which you are. If there's one thing you need to understand it's that properly implemented ketogenic or low carb diets (generally along the lines of Paleo although it "Paleo" can also be implemented with significant amounts of carbohydrates well) consistently reverse all of the risk factors of the diseases of civilization which are: 1. Metabolic disease -- some types of renal disease, some types of liver disease (non-alcohol fatty liver disease in particular), pancreatic disease (namely diabetes), and metabolic syndrome including obesity. 2. Cardiovascular disease including heart disease, stroke, and other vascular disease 3. Some types of autoimmune diseases namely MS, rheumatoid arthritis, sometimes hashimoto's thyroiditis, celiac (well, that's more gluten in particular), crohn's, etc. 4. Some types of neurodegenerative disease such as parkinson's, alzheimer's, sometimes ALS, MS, etc. | ||
|
Dante08
Singapore4147 Posts
On July 02 2011 21:00 eshlow wrote: Lots of stuff you can do: http://www.eatmoveimprove.com/2010/03/the-fundamentals-of-bodyweight-strength-training Depends on your goals No, going below parallel is fine if your technique is good. Below parallel on bench is very bad if you're doing it wrong. Fine if you're doing it right. Hmm, generally should feel squatting more in the legs unless your back is really a weak link wihch is certainly possible. Try to sit back more and get the weight more onto the heels which will help keep torso more upright and minimize strain on the back and let your glutes and such do more of the lifting Thanks I'll work on it | ||
|
jjhchsc2
Korea (South)2393 Posts
| ||
|
AoN.DimSum
United States2983 Posts
watch at 4:20 for a good protein shake | ||
|
xJupiter9x
United States150 Posts
| ||
|
Kamais_Ookin
Canada4218 Posts
| ||
|
BouBou.865
Netherlands814 Posts
On July 03 2011 08:58 sc4k wrote: @BouBou. 2 hours a day seems too much? I'd stick to 1 hour/ 1 hour 15 a day if I were you. Get in get out, get your protein...personally I warm up with either a run or 20 mins on that crazy stepper thing at a horrifically high setting like 20. It's possible to workout too much? : / I have been going 15 mins cardio, like 10 exercises over 2 muscle groups, 4 sets each, 15 mins of cardio to loosen up after. Sorry to bomb the forum with these questions that are probably answered in SS, but I'll have it in a week Probably ordering some Adidas shoes, then. The nikes are hideous imo. | ||
|
sc4k
United Kingdom5454 Posts
On July 03 2011 17:52 BouBou.865 wrote: It's possible to workout too much? : / I have been going 15 mins cardio, like 10 exercises over 2 muscle groups, 4 sets each, 15 mins of cardio to loosen up after. Sorry to bomb the forum with these questions that are probably answered in SS, but I'll have it in a week Probably ordering some Adidas shoes, then. The nikes are hideous imo.Ok although I am just waiting for someone to come and provide a study that shows everything I have learned is wrong: for exercises that aren't the most important ones, (DL, BP, Squats) I have read from many sources that 3 sets is the optimal amount. The law of diminishing returns kind of works here, the 4th set of many exercises will be a wasted expense of energy, in return for the work it does for the muscle. I read that in Bill Pearl's 'getting stronger' as well as many other resources, but I don't know how rigorously this theory has been tested... I have also read that it is conventional wisdom to get in, get out. I try to keep most workouts to 45mins to 1hr. I honestly don't know exactly why, it could be because you simply run out of your glycogen supply after too much work and then starting burning through your muscle (could be total pseudoscience though -.-), or because it is mentally draining, or because your body wants to start recovering around the 1 hr mark and you have done enough work and any more is overtraining...I have read many bodybuilders and trainers advising not to do 2 hr workouts. And from what I have read, bearing in mind I am just waiting for this to be disproven, you can 'overtrain' and 2 hrs a day is too much. I have also read that the total amount of sets you want to do for big muscles is 12-15, and for smaller muscles 9-12. PS @ Mithrandir. Please don't be rude or nonchalant to eshlow. He is a very knowledgable and helpful guy who provides studies with his statements and has put over 400 pages of hard work into helping everyone at the TLHF thread. He has invested his time for free into this thread, given many of us extremely good advice. Please treat him with some respect. The last thing we want is for him to be discouraged from helping us because of people consistently underestimating him and forcing him to make quality arguments page in page out. | ||
|
Sneakyz
Sweden2361 Posts
You can't really conclude that 2 hrs a day is too much just because "you can overtrain" though, even though It's highly likely. | ||
| ||
. Still, squatting felt great even if I had to be quite humble and kick down 20kg from my smith machine weight.
