Jump to content


  • Sisu loend

  • Liitus

  • Viimati külastanud

  • Päevavõidud


MaPo viimane päevavõit oli August 18

MaPo's oli kõige populaarsem sisu!

Kogukonna Reputatsioon

23 Natuke juba nagu teab midagi


  • Tase
  • Sünnipäev 03.02.1969

Profiili informatsioon

  • Sugu
  1. Conclusions: Current evidence shows no adverse effects of higher protein intakes. Although there were positive trends on BMD at most bone sites, only the LS showed moderate evidence to support benefits of higher protein intake. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28404575
  2. "Popovich's recent analysis of data of the link between protein intake and net protein balance in weight training individuals that confirms two things: (a) there's still way too little data to make definite statements about the existence of something like a saturation effect, and (b) the RDA of 0.8g protein per kg body weight is way below the 1.35g protein per kg body weight, Popovich calculated as the minimum to achieve net protein balance and thus preserve muscle mass (in that, I assume that the net protein breakdown with <1.35g/kg would come from muscle protein - at least in parts)"
  3. Meta-analysis of 17 subgroups from nine studies says you need >1.35 g protein/kg body weight/day to optimize muscle anabolism (Popovich 2017) -- Recently, there have been several studies seeking to quantify the "optimal" protein intake for muscle gains in strength-trained individuals. Greg E Popovich's recent meta-analysis of nine studies that assessed their subjects nitrogen balance is thus a timely review of both, older and novel evidence on the topic. Popovich aimed to As previously highlighted, Popovich found nine studies with at a total of 17 subgroups for his analysis, which included testing nitrogen retention for correlations against 10 independent variables (protein intake, energy intake, energy balance, average reported daily strength-training duration, lean body mass) using multiple models. Figure 3: Just in case you forgot what the net protein balance is, and why it is important when we're talking about 'gains or no gains', I suggest you (re-)read my 2015 article about "Net Protein Retention and Dietary Protein" |read it! Popovich's linear regression model revealed positive correlations between daily nitrogen intake and nitrogen retention (r = .510) which approached significance (p ≤ .06). When normalized for body weight, the correlation became (a) more pronounced (r = .698) and (b) statistically highly significant (p ≤ .006) What may be the most important result of the study is that the RDA of 0.8g/kg body weight is only ~60% of the amount of protein you need to keep the status quo (0-balance). When Popovich writes that "the data suggest that resistance-trained persons consume greater than 1.35 g protein/kg body weight/day to optimize muscle anabolism" (ibid.) the emphasis should be on greater - after all, 1.35g/kg is enough only to maintain the status quo of resistance trainees.
  4. Kreatiin Proteiin

    Tõsijutt, ja midagi ei juhtu ka siis, kui võtad esimest vähem-rohkem-harvem, jne. Kui meelde tuleb, paned teelusikatäie suhu.
  5. Joga

    https://medium.com/the-method/theres-nothing-special-about-yoga-cba84b9012ce Yoga Is Exercise The media has represented these studies as groundbreaking research, but it turns out that they aren’t, really. People have been looking at yoga as an intervention for conditions from lower back pain to depression for years. It turns out that, when you do a massive study with hundreds or even thousands of participants, yoga does…not so well. In fact, it is basically indistinguishable from any other form of light exercise. To put it another way, there’s no health difference between yoga and going for a walk in the park.
  6. Otter, kõik on hästi, ja teada, et sellised artiklid eksisteerivad, nagu ka roti-uuringud 1920-dest, mis leiavad, et valk on kõige kurja juur. Aga miks te tsitaadi seal ära lõpetate, kust alles huvitavaks läheb: "A moderate intake of 1.5 g/(kg ⋅ d) may be easily included in the acceptable protein intake range (AMDR 10–35%) for most individuals. However, currently, no objective standard for protein consumption >0.8 g/(kg ⋅ d) exists. It is important to distinguish between the amount of protein that is required to optimize bone and muscle health and the amount necessary to prevent a deficiency. It is also important to note that high-protein diets are harmful to CKD patients; however, for healthy kidney patients, in view of the findings of several studies, the consumption of a high-protein diet appears to be more advantageous than deleterious. In addition, dietary protein seems to play an important role in other metabolic processes, such as satiety, cellular signaling, and thermogenic and glycemic regulation in the body. However, this effect becomes important only when consumption is above the RDI; thus, it seems likely that protein intake above the RDI could be advantageous in many situations. " Esindate ka väga edukalt kirsinoppijat jätkuvalt.
  7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22150425 Our consensus opinion is that leucine, and possibly the other branched-chain amino acids, occupy a position of prominence in stimulating muscle protein synthesis; that protein intakes in the range of 1.3-1.8 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) consumed as 3-4 isonitrogenous meals will maximize muscle protein synthesis. These recommendations may also be dependent on training status: experienced athletes would require less, while more protein should be consumed during periods of high frequency/intensity training. Elevated protein consumption, as high as 1.8-2.0 g · kg(-1) · day(-1) depending on the caloric deficit, may be advantageous in preventing lean mass losses during periods of energy restriction to promote fat loss.
  8. Räusake aga mõnuga ja lugege neis keeltes, milles suudate. Ei saa aru võõrkeelest? Tough luck. Aga mida see "facepalm" üldse tähendab? Miks tõlget ei ole? "Ja mis lollus "ei tea mis arst in mida kunagu 6ppinud?" Ise ka loed seda jama, mida sa kirjutad? Usun, et kui arst ravib v6hihaigeid, siis teadmisi peaks tal teadagi rohkem olema, kui internetist googeldaval pseudo-treeneril.. ja usu mind, inimene elas viimase hetkeni symptomiteta." - kui selline "tsitaat" ja järeldus sellest on kõik, mida "oponent" kokku suudab kirjutada, võiks olla vähemalt niipalju eneseanalüüsi võimekust, mis ei laseks seda avalikkuse ette, isegi anonüümselt mitte, guest kylaline. Päris kahju on küll sellest, tõesti, et teadusartikleid, autorid eesti keelde, kui ühte olulisemasse, ei lase tõlkida, et iga kylaine aru saaks.
  9. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290623278_The_effects_of_a_high_protein_diet_on_indices_of_health_and_body_composition_-_a_crossover_trial_in_resistance-trained_men -------------------------------------------------------------------------- https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12970-015-0100-0 Furthermore, there is no evidence that consuming a high protein diet has any deleterious effects. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/excess-protein-bad-kidneys-true-rocco-venizelos
  10. https://www.core3training.com/top-6-myths-high-protein-diets-facts-behind-fiction/
  11. Olen täiesti kindel, et sedalaadi teemasid on siin mitmeid juba ees - ja ikka tulevad sama teooriaga uued targad peale. Foorumis võiks olla *otsing* - äkki on ka? Arstid ajavad kahjuks jama. See on nagu linnalegend, mis sai alguse mitukümmend aastat tagasi ja ei saa ega saa otsa. Uued põlvkonnad , isegi, ei viitsi end faktide ja uuringutega kurssi viia - laiskus, mugavus või "autoriteetide" (kes siinkohal on siis need arstid" mõju on nii suur. Ei ole olemas universaalset "üleliigset valku" - i.e. mitte keegi ei saa öelda, ilma teadamata, missugune on inimese tegevus/eesmärgid, kui suur on tema norm. Kindel on aga see, et alla 1g/kehakg kohta - ei ole mingit põhjust seda hoida - see on küll universaalne miinimum. Optimaalseks peetakse, keskmist inimest arvestades, 1 - 1,5 g kg kohta. Mis pudutab neere ja valku - kui inimesel ei ole teadaolevalt eespool mainitutega seoses mingeid kõrvalekaldeid, diagnoositud puudulikkust, ei ole ka põhjust rääkida "valkude negatiivsest toimest neerudele" või et "neerud peavad tegema üleliigset tööd" - need kogused oleks juba nii suured, et meiesugustel sellele mõelda ei ole tarvis. Ja mis võiks inimestele omaseks saada - kui keegi, olgu see siis kasvõi arst, midagi väidab, tuleb küsida, millel põhineb see väide. Väitja peab tõestama teaduspõhiselt enda öeldut, eriti, kui tegemist on meditsiiniga seotud inimesega. See, et keegi n kunagi omandanud mingi hariduse, ei ole piisav. Eriti puudutab see just meditsiinivaldkonda, kus toimub pidev arusaamade uuenemine, ümbervaatamine. Antonio J, Ellerbroek A, Silver T, et al. A high protein diet has no harmful effects: a one-year crossover study in resistance-trained males. J Nutr Metab. 2016b https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jnme/2016/9104792/ However, the fact that they increased their protein intake by ~32% and still had no deleterious side effects is further evidence that a high protein diet in exercise-trained individuals is indeed safe. Prolonged intake of a large amount of protein has been associated with potential dangers, such as bone mineral loss and kidney damage. In otherwise healthy individuals, there is little evidence that high protein intake is dangerous. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/proceedings-of-the-nutrition-society/article/efficacy-and-consequences-of-veryhighprotein-diets-for-athletes-and-exercisers/E4773A654FFC8F640299821A13D1A368 Jne jne.
  12. See noppimine oli järgmise põhjusega (kui tõesti veel ei olnud piisavalt arusaadav "Lihtsalt üks näide kohalikust "tervise ja toitumise" teavitusest. Üldjoontes on kõik neil hästi, aga keegi ei taha süveneda detailidesse, või seletada pikemalt. Minnakse lihtsamat teed."): parem on kohe leida allikas, kust ei pea lisainventuuri tegema. Ja see lihtsalt jäi silma, ilma otsimata. Igaühel on oma "anded".
  13. Possible Reasons for Low Levels of Progesterone Hormone in Women • High Estrogen Levels: Higher estrogen levels can overpower the body’s hormones, throwing production of other hormones including progesterone out of gear.• Chronic Stress: Stress affects your body in many ways. It can make you sick and it can upset the normal function of your body when it overtakes your life. Chronic stress is stress is one of the causative factors of low levels of progesterone hormone in women.• Lack of Proper Exercise: Exercise is essential to good overall health. Without it your body’s natural functions don’t get the proper signals they require to determine how best to maintain a healthy level of activity.• Resistance to Insulin: A condition that doesn’t allow the body to use the insulin it makes. Associated with obesity, it can also play a part in low Progesterone levels.• Lack of Proper Nutrition: When the body is starved of proper nutrition it is unable maintain itself. Certain foods may also help unbalance your hormones.• Medication Interaction: Certain medications don’t interact well with each other and can have side effects that affect your body’s function.• PCOS (Poly Cystic Ovarian Syndrome): A disorder caused by a lack of ovulation in a woman, this disorder causes issues with the interaction of hormones, ovaries and brain. It also usually means infertility without treatment by as doctor. Ole, sa, nüüd see mees, spetsialist, ja pane inimesele paari kirja põhjal diagnoos, ja anna "ravi" . Kas siis rasva on vähe menüüs või äkki on ülekaal/vähenenud füüsiline aktiivsus põhjuseks (stress on ka tõenäoliselt "näksima" pannud tihedamalt)? Ennustame, või kuidas see pihta pannakse - ikka siit - klaviatuuri ja ekraani kaudu.
  14. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3964851/ * Obesity is thought to cause an increase in endometrial cancer due to abnormal levels of several hormones, most notably increased estrogen levels. Estrogen is a known endometrial growth factor, and, after menopause, the primary source of estrogen is peripheral tissues, including adipose. Adipocytes produce aromatase, which converts androgens to estrone and estradiol. Aromatase levels increase as a function of age and obesity and, as such, levels correspond with an increasing BMI in postmenopausal women (Cauley et al., 1989; Simpson and Mendelson, 1987; Morriset et al., 2006). Accordingly, postmenopausal obese women have >40% increases in both circulating estrone (E1) and estradiol (E2) as compared to postmenopausal women with a BMI in the normal range (Cauley et al., 1989). With increasing adiposity, serum hormone-binding globulin levels are decreased, which serves to amplify the effects of excess estrogen. Serum hormone-binding globulin binds estrogen and testosterone, decreasing their activity. In addition, we have observed (KK Leslie, unpublished observations) that endometrial and breast cancer cell lines contain high levels of 17-β hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type I, which converts estrone to estradiol, thus serving to increase local estradiol levels *Taken together, these data demonstrate that obesity influences the biologically active levels of these steroid hormones irrespective of de novo hormone synthesis.. * * It is clear that most of these women are progesterone deficient, at least relative to circulating estrogen levels and increased IGF1/insulin signaling. Weight loss will likely reverse the hormonal imbalances and dysregulation of the IGF/insulin pathway. Unfortunately, most patients are unsuccessful in their weight loss endeavors, and, for those that are successful, the beneficial effects of weight loss on hormone levels may take a year or more to be realized. These individuals need help to protect their endometrium while they are in the process of lifestyle changes in order to lose weight. We propose that a simple intervention is the progestin-containing IUD. Widespread use of progestin-containing IUDs for women at risk could, for the first time in over 30 years, substantially reduce the incidence of this potentially preventable disease.
  15. Just jäi silma - uue teadusartikli analüüs/tõlgendus, mis peaks ka "tavainimesele" arusaadav olema. Shed 25% Extra-Fat (1.6kg/12Wks) + Improve Glucose Levels by Adding 2.5h/Wk of Walking to Your/Clients' Fatloss Diet/s A whole-foods-based diet, a reasonable caloric restriction (here -500kcal/d) and an exercise routine you or your clients will actually comply to. That's all it takes to see the fat coming off. Slowly, but progressively... "It doesn't always have to be a super-intense workout, to ..." I think I've written that before, and the study at hand further supports this statement. The less trained and the further off of a healthy weight your clients or you, yourself, are, the more effective will even light "exercise" interventions... and/or increases in non-exercise physical can be.By the way, even though the study at hand dealt with overweight/obese untrained subjects, there's still a takeaway message for athletes and their coaches, as well: it's the diet that's driving the weight loss, it's your training (and to a very small degree supplements) which ensure that what you lose is predominantly fat.That a combination of "cardio" (or non-exercise physical activity, which is imho what the walking in the study at hand was) and weight training would probably yield superior improvements in body composition goes without saying, right? https://suppversity.blogspot.com.ee/2017/08/shed-25-extra-fat-16kgwk-improve.html Lühidalt: Lihtsalt KÕNDIMINE (ise eeldan, et võiks nimetada tempokas - mitte jalutamine..) ca 2,5 h nädalas, ja menüü, mis koosneb tasakaalustatult nn täistoiduainetest (illustreerivad näidisfotod on lisatud:) ja negatiivne kaloraaž - 500 kcal, ligilähedasest baasainevahetusest arvestades, on võimalused kaotada 3 nädalaga poolteist kg lisarasva. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ja, sina, loe palun seda - jah, sina, spetsialist. The diet contained less than 15% saturated fat (as % of total fat) and was based on conventional, mixed foods. The main components were low-fat foodstuffs, e.g., whole-grain bread and cereals, vegetables, and fruits.Quality counts: A particular emphasis was put on the intake of lean, protein-rich foods, such as lean meat and fish, skimmed milk, and low-fat dairy products. Furthermore, participants were encouraged not to eat highly processed and fried food. but it is certainly noteworthy that the caloric deficit was achieved solely by reducing the carb and fat intake by 105g and 57g per day, respectively - the protein intake, on the other hand, was kept stable. See, nagu näha töötab. Teisiti on ka kindlasti võimalik - aga las need teiste lähenemiste proponendid tõestavad oma katsetega, et tulemus on sama, või paremgi.