Diet Thread

Forum rules
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.
CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:14 am

The immune system is not as effective in winter vs summer.
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/seas ... -to-summer

Skin issues in winter may also be due to poorer circulation. In cold weather heat is retained better by limiting blood flow to skin which preserves heat.
People also do not tend to drink as much fluid in winter, or be as active, which also reduces blood flow to the periphery.
Winter air tends to be drier, and combined with reduced peripheral circn, the skin is drier and more prone to micro-cracks.

Less fresh fruit and veges are eaten in winter due to higher price and unseasonality.
People eat more heavier foods (starches and fats), and these may contribute to inflammation, and less anti-inflammatory and antioxidant intake.

march83
Posts: 768
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:41 pm

Re: Diet Thread

Postby march83 » Wed Dec 20, 2017 9:33 am

...Vitamin D from the sun declines, daylight hours change so circadian rhythms change, hormones change. Nutritional makeup of foods changes based on seasonal change. Diet changes based on weather and available foods...

So many reasons.
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Wed Dec 20, 2017 6:08 pm

A nice study that further demolishes BMI, in that there is a trend fat to lean tissue ratio has increased over the last 30 years, when considering two people of equal height and weight. So BMI usage masks that people on average have less muscle than 30 years earlier, and more fat. The study adds weight to using waist and hip circumferences vs height as an indicator of body fat %.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 3517304711

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/wo ... b0d520ad83

"The Deakin University study published in the journal Preventative Medicine found the average waist circumference of women in 2011-12 was 6.7cm bigger than for women of the same body weight and height in 1989.

And male waistlines were wider by 2.8cm, over the same period. “Waist circumference grew significantly more than would be expected, even when taking into account increases in weight over the same period, about 5.4 kilograms for women and seven kilos for men,” lead researcher Emma Gearon said. The best explanation was that people were increasingly carrying more fat and less muscle."
....
“But this study shows that the proportion of individuals who are not obese according to their BMI — but are obese according to their waist circumference — has increased dramatically over time,” said Ms Gearon, who’s a research fellow at Deakin’s Global Obesity Centre and PhD candidate at Monash University. The phenomenon was most pronounced for adult women."

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19081
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Diet Thread

Postby mikesbytes » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:26 pm

Thanks CK, I was aware that a sizeable % of those in the healthy BMI weight range had fat levels that would of put them in the overweight range if they had the amount of muscle that the original BMI figures were based on. However I hadn't seen any studies, or even news articles. I suspect that statically a sizeable portion of those in the healthy weight range with too much stored fat are doing dramatically less passive exercise than those in the original BMI study, way back then. Things as simple as climbing a staircase have been replaced with escalators and the walk to the shops has been replaced with driving.
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Wed Dec 20, 2017 8:49 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Thanks CK, I was aware that a sizeable % of those in the healthy BMI weight range had fat levels that would of put them in the overweight range if they had the amount of muscle that the original BMI figures were based on. However I hadn't seen any studies, or even news articles. I suspect that statically a sizeable portion of those in the healthy weight range with too much stored fat are doing dramatically less passive exercise than those in the original BMI study, way back then. Things as simple as climbing a staircase have been replaced with escalators and the walk to the shops has been replaced with driving.


yes average activity levels have decreased profoundly in Australia...
I sense we've hit a low point, and that more people are questioning quality and meaning of life.
There's a guy on utube I follow who talks about this stuff (Jordan Peterson) and I note his popularity has surged this year.
It's indicative of the masses beginning to find their power! :shock:

Nobody
Posts: 8869
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Thu Dec 21, 2017 10:36 am

mikesbytes wrote:In regards to the study, I'd say that the difference is that those doing the exercise to reduce their weight were putting more stress on their cartilage than those dieting during the study period.

There were those that did both exercise and diet who also benefited IIRC. Although those who lose weight without diet are going to have to do a lot more exercise than those who diet, for the same weight loss gains.

mikesbytes wrote:As cartilage is effectively dead then nutrition can't directly benefit it. Nutrition can help with other issues associated with the knee area.

Nutrition must have benefited cartilage at some point in time, otherwise it couldn't have grown in the first place. My understanding is that the joints are fed by fluids derived from the blood. The healthier your blood, the healthier the fluid.

Just like doctors expect the average male's systolic blood pressure to rise at 1mm of mercury a year from 20 yo in wealthy countries. So I believe the average rate of decay of knee cartilage in wealthy countries probably has a lot to do with diet.

CKinnard wrote:Winter air tends to be drier, and combined with reduced peripheral circn, the skin is drier and more prone to micro-cracks.

Thanks. Yes, this is my problem. The first time the problem appeared was when I went out for an extended ride with some people in 13 degC without gloves. I ended up with lots of small cracks on my hands and that night the hives started. From then on I noted that certain foods would bring on the problem more about 2 hours after eating. By mid summer, you wouldn't know I had a problem.

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Thu Dec 21, 2017 11:17 am

Nobody wrote:
mikesbytes wrote:As cartilage is effectively dead then nutrition can't directly benefit it. Nutrition can help with other issues associated with the knee area.

Nutrition must have benefited cartilage at some point in time, otherwise it couldn't have grown in the first place. My understanding is that the joints are fed by fluids derived from the blood. The healthier your blood, the healthier the fluid.

Just like doctors expect the average male's systolic blood pressure to rise at 1mm of mercury a year from 20 yo in wealthy countries. So I believe the average rate of decay of knee cartilage in wealthy countries probably has a lot to do with diet.


Whoa! Mike, did you say that about cartilage! wash your mouth out! :)
Mate, every cell in the body needs nutrition and oxygen.
You might mean there's a lack of pain receptors in cartilage.
Nutrition and appropriate hydration are imperative to cartilage health.

Like spinal discs and special sense organs, cartilage is highly vulnerable to reductions in circulation, due to atherosclerosis and excessive serum fat. The blood flow is indirect via fine fragile capillaries that have to traverse many cm's of cancellous and cortical bone.

This stuff is just so patently validated by fundamental physiology and adequate studies, and yet, so poorly appreciated by your average doctor.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19081
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Diet Thread

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Dec 28, 2017 8:49 pm

Thanks guys for the correction

Well I've been fed some bad info on knee cartridge, but unfortunately the correction hasn't been all good news


<snip>Since cartilage loss cannot be reversed</snip>

Statements like this imply that damage/wear that has already happened can't be reversed, which implies that cell regeneration doesn't happen. However Wikipedia says;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cartilage
Repair

Cartilage has limited repair capabilities: Because chondrocytes are bound in lacunae, they cannot migrate to damaged areas. Therefore, cartilage damage is difficult to heal. Also, because hyaline cartilage does not have a blood supply, the deposition of new matrix is slow. Damaged hyaline cartilage is usually replaced by fibrocartilage scar tissue. Over the last years, surgeons and scientists have elaborated a series of cartilage repair procedures that help to postpone the need for joint replacement.

Bioengineering techniques are being developed to generate new cartilage, using a cellular "scaffolding" material and cultured cells to grow artificial cartilage.[5]
Which suggests that minor issues might be reversible but major issues have no chance
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

Nobody
Posts: 8869
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Thu Dec 28, 2017 10:07 pm

mikesbytes wrote:Which suggests that minor issues might be reversible but major issues have no chance

Which is why the industries which have knowingly deceived us and/or promoted foods which promote inflammation have done us all a disservice. If only by our discs and cartilages degrading faster than they would have though our lifetimes.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19081
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Diet Thread

Postby mikesbytes » Fri Dec 29, 2017 2:32 pm

^^^ boils down to maximising profit. They are not financially linked to the problems

Had the low carb vegetarians over again and they were having a semi cheat day. He told me he's lost 10Kg and he doesn't feel the desire to snack between meals. Its certainly working for them. He noted that he put on a lot of work when he started working and was buying lunch, which he has stopped doing. They brought chicken which was left over from their Christmas day lunch, no point them keeping it, they don't eat it.

As a guest at someone elses place another guest turned up on a skateboard, a vegan. To my surprise the hosts hadn't made any vegan dishes, which the vegan said she was use to and just snacked on this and that. I don't know if the hosts knew and forgot or if it was the first time she had been over. When I invite someone for the first time I check to see what dietary restrictions they have, apart from choices, there could be an allergy or any of many different medical conditions.
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Fri Dec 29, 2017 3:48 pm

I think you guys maybe over estimating what food manufacturers know about the health effects of nutrition.
I have known a dozen or so senior managers and techs from the industry over time. They just conform with food processing legislation, and create meals in accord with their qualitative research.

Because the majority of people do not enjoy vegetables, that steers manufacturers to providing processed meals with a starch, fat, protein, salt, sugar bias. Processed food is a very competitive market, and most people who buy it do so because they couldn't be bothered cooking with fresh ingredients.

So it's a chicken and egg scenario. People get addicted to salt sugar fat, then prefer more of it in their processed foods. The processors oblige after doing qualitative research, which I've been a part of many times when in advertising. That was when I first started to see how ignorant and unhealthy the masses are. I'd had sensible parents who ensured I was brought up and educated well, and thought all adults knew what I knew. But they don't. What I did learn was that there is a strong association between intelligence, strong family values, and education on the one hand; and quality of diet on the other.

Over the years I've further seen assocations between mindset and physiology. Mesomorphic and endomorphic framed people prefer heavier diets with less vegetables and fruit. I don't think I've ever found a study, but if you gave me 6 anthropomorphic measures (skeletal frame), I'd bet I could guess their dietary preferences correctly at least 65% of the time.

Nobody
Posts: 8869
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Sat Dec 30, 2017 10:35 pm

mikesbytes wrote:^^^ boils down to maximising profit. They are not financially linked to the problems

True. If they were, it would probably put them out of business. But the government will likely finally act too little, too late.

mikesbytes wrote:Had the low carb vegetarians over again and they were having a semi cheat day.

Needing to cheat usually means they won't last IMO. My brother-in-law is no longer vegan after "temporarily" quitting for an overseas holiday. He's noticeably heavier these days.

CKinnard wrote:Because the majority of people do not enjoy vegetables, that steers manufacturers to providing processed meals with a starch, fat, protein, salt, sugar bias. Processed food is a very competitive market, and most people who buy it do so because they couldn't be bothered cooking with fresh ingredients.

I can totally understand the "couldn't be bothered" since it takes me about 40 mins to cook lunch with a lot of that time weighing. washing and chopping. Sometimes I think of skipping it, but all I need to do is remind myself that cooking like this is the primary action that has changed my life over recent years. And I only need to do it once a day. Breakfast is pretty simple and then the rest of my diet is fruit.
I do remember what it was like to find veg bland. But now I understand what (now departed) casual_cyclist used to say about loving veg. Eating 2 big bowls of boiled veg is now one of the highlights of my day. I use fresh onion, garlic, with some no-salt tomato paste for the added nutritional benefit and flavour.

CKinnard wrote:So it's a chicken and egg scenario. People get addicted to salt sugar fat, then prefer more of it in their processed foods. The processors oblige after doing qualitative research, which I've been a part of many times when in advertising.

Looks more like the circling of the plug hole scenario to me. :wink: Lack of discipline leading to more lack of discipline, in a slowly worsening pattern.
We all see the health damage that is done every day. If not in our own lives, then in the lives of people around us.

CKinnard wrote:What I did learn was that there is a strong association between intelligence, strong family values, and education on the one hand; and quality of diet on the other.

Yes. This can easily be confirmed by just driving through some rich suburbs. Not many heavyweights there.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19081
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Diet Thread

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:47 am

Article gives a bunch of dietary advice which we have seen before. What caught my eye was the statement about protein

Research has been done to show that having protein does have that appetite regulating effect


Perhaps this falls under the body continued to demand until it has what it needs

http://www.news.com.au/national/south-australia/csiro-says-eating-25g-of-protein-at-breakfast-could-help-control-weight/news-story/6b52218f964a7bc80a8c364d41f703a8
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Thu Jan 04, 2018 1:42 pm



I think most of us who read this thread understand
- excess protein cannot be stored so it is recommended to spread doses out through the day, over three or more meals.
- when losing weight, extra protein intake helps preserve lean tissue. i.e. 1.25-1.8g/kg bwt/day.

Lots of overweight ppl are not hungry when they wake up, so they don't have breakfast or have a very small one.

Why aren't they hungry?
Because they've been resting with reduced stress overnight, and their stress hormones reduce relatively and blood flow through the gut and fat tissue is enhanced.
Because free T3 hormone is at its highest between 10pm and 9am (slowly decreasing to its ebb between 2p-9p).
Because adrenalin rises in the morning.
These points facilitate better mobilization and metabolism of fat reserves which is our main energy substrate.
Note that there is no correlation between morning appetite and blood glucose levels being lowest at this time (due to overnight fast).
So low blood glucose does not drive hunger, at least in the morning for the overweight.

I think a lot can be learned about hunger stimuli from fasting. If you go on a water fast, you can learn much about hunger driven by hormones, blood glucose, ketosis, rest or relaxation state.

I am currently on Day 4 of a water fast...so I haven't eaten anything in 2018.
I feel physically weak when I try to do stuff, but that varies throughout the day.
I am walking 2-4km a day, usually split am and pm.
I am doing a lot of reading and utube though, but don't feel significantly impaired.
I am least hungry in the mornings, and short hunger periods are noticed 2pm-4pm.
So I go for a walk at this time to take my attention off hunger, and stimulate blood flow.
The pangs are settling though. Day 2 was worst, but not unbearable at all.
Today, so far I haven't had any at all. In fact, my belly feels quite full and uncomfortable.
I put this down to carrying extra weight (high 88kg). I also think uncomfortable feelings associated with hunger in the abdomen relate to enteric and autonomic nerve state, state of visceral muscle, and water content (more water in the intestines and their linings makes the abdomen feel heavier).

My appetite is not associated with blood glucose readings, not in the first few days, nor now.

The CSIRO would benefit from understanding hunger better than they currently do.
Nutrition and obesity science is still in its infancy in my view because it doesn't adopt a whole systems approach.
Until we understand hunger drive better, advice such as 25g protein for breakfast are temporary band aids on major trauma.

Patt0
Posts: 327
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 6:31 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Patt0 » Thu Jan 04, 2018 8:44 pm

I am definitely at the higher end. 100g for breakfast at the moment. Was 150g last week.
Image

Nobody
Posts: 8869
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Thu Jan 04, 2018 9:58 pm

CKinnard wrote:Nutrition and obesity science is still in its infancy in my view because it doesn't adopt a whole systems approach.
Until we understand hunger drive better, advice such as 25g protein for breakfast are temporary band aids on major trauma.

I had the similar thought when I heard it on the news. That it needs to be a whole system or multi-faceted approach.
Another thought I had at the time was the last thing "protein-aholics" in general need is another "expert" telling them they need even more protein. The average AU diet is already 15% protein (20% in the US) which hasn't appeared to have done much for them so far. That should be too much already. Of course the word protein to most is just a synonym for meat, or eggs. I'd say problems like lack of sleep, lack of exercise, or being a salad/veg dodger would be bigger issues than not getting enough protein for breakfast.

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19081
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Diet Thread

Postby mikesbytes » Thu Jan 04, 2018 10:50 pm

That particular article did talk about the sources of protein and suggested largely vegetable/grain/nut sources, it did mention eggs. What they did do was quote protein in grams rather than a % which makes sense as protein needs vary with activity.

Anyway, I didn't post the article to talk about how much protein or where to source it, I was interested in statement that it deals with appetite. And CK has come back with an interesting point about not feeling hungry when you wake despite the low sugar levels
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

Baalzamon
Posts: 5399
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2007 2:23 pm
Location: Yangebup

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Baalzamon » Thu Jan 04, 2018 11:12 pm

CKinnard wrote:I am currently on Day 4 of a water fast...so I haven't eaten anything in 2018.
I feel physically weak when I try to do stuff, but that varies throughout the day.


That is odd. Since I have done an 85km spirited bike ride on the 4th day water fasted.... Might be your body telling you it may be time to quit or your not supplementing salt.
Masi Speciale CX 2008 - Brooks B17 special saddle, Garmin Edge 810
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:54 am

Baalzamon wrote:That is odd. Since I have done an 85km spirited bike ride on the 4th day water fasted.... Might be your body telling you it may be time to quit or your not supplementing salt.


wow, you rode 85km 4 days into a water fast, as in not doing any Calories or caffeine whatsoever?
how long do you intend fasting for?

Of all the fasting gurus I've met, read, and worked with, all strongly advise to rest doing small amounts of light exercise only.
Your blood volume decreases when fasting, significantly. By Day 7 of a water fast, you can be down 20%. So spirited exercise will stress your heart by driving your heart rate higher due to lower stroke volume.
Taking salt accelerates potassium chloride loss, which increases probability of arrhythmia.
Your liver and kidneys get highly stressed during a fast. You can confirm this with a blood test, where relevant markers go ballistic.
They don't need the additional stress of excess exercise.
It pays to understand water fasting is a seriously stressful state for the body. you are breaking down protein (muscle and other lean tissue) at a much higher rate than usual, which contributes to liver and kidney stress. Gout from high purine loads is a high risk factor for those genetically predisposed.

I don't know the longest fast you've done (me = 40days), but adverse symptoms peak around days 4-6, after which most ppl have transitioned into full ketosis.

Patt0
Posts: 327
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 6:31 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Patt0 » Fri Jan 05, 2018 9:56 am

CKinnard wrote:Nutrition and obesity science is still in its infancy in my view because it doesn't adopt a whole systems approach.



There are published works 100's of years old that outline the reasons for fat accumulation and how to reverse it. The complexity of food pyramids, daily requirements, what is harmful and what is not. Only a small percent of the most intelligent people of the most intelligent species on this planet can decipher what is real, and have the will to implement it. And all the other wild animals, insects etc..

I think we went on a tangent so long ago that humans dont know where they are in regards to nutrition. I am not quite three months in on a very basic diet that 99.9% would consider absurd and warn me off it. But all the symtoms of disease are gone and inflammation is gone.

Anyway look at all the technological advances we now have as a result of having a large pool of sick people to study metabolism etc. If you are so inclined, you could even profit from it.
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:23 am

Patt0 wrote:
CKinnard wrote:Nutrition and obesity science is still in its infancy in my view because it doesn't adopt a whole systems approach.



There are published works 100's of years old that outline the reasons for fat accumulation and how to reverse it. The complexity of food pyramids, daily requirements, what is harmful and what is not.


And once you've read a lot of that research over 4 decades, you begin to understand the published works have not on the whole, explored individual systems or interrelationships between multiple systems.
There is essentially no understanding of what drives bulimia and anorexia, and there are no cures for it.
Hunger signaling is not 100s of years old, and is not well understood. Leptin, ghrelin, and the gut's K and L cells are only recent discoveries.
There are many paradoxes about hunger, such as not being hungry in the morning when blood glucose is lowest.
The obesity epidemic is only 40 years old.
It's easy to make nutrition and weight management sound simple, because one can say weight gain is simply due to eating excessive Calories, but in my 'money making' pursuits in the field, turning off hunger and inappropriate appetite is not so simple, even after nutrition volume and quality are improved. One significant life stressor can stir unhealthy cravings up again.
My clinical experience points to hunger signaling having a very strong psychoemotional stress component that dysregulates endocrine, autonomic, and enteric function....but there are essentially no studies exploring this cascade.

Patt0
Posts: 327
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 6:31 am
Location: Brisbane

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Patt0 » Fri Jan 05, 2018 10:45 am

CKinnard wrote:
Patt0 wrote:
CKinnard wrote:Nutrition and obesity science is still in its infancy in my view because it doesn't adopt a whole systems approach.



There are published works 100's of years old that outline the reasons for fat accumulation and how to reverse it. The complexity of food pyramids, daily requirements, what is harmful and what is not.


And once you've read a lot of that research over 4 decades, you begin to understand the published works have not on the whole, explored individual systems or interrelationships between multiple systems.
There is essentially no understanding of what drives bulimia and anorexia, and there are no cures for it.
Hunger signaling is not 100s of years old, and is not well understood. Leptin, ghrelin, and the gut's K and L cells are only recent discoveries.
There are many paradoxes about hunger, such as not being hungry in the morning when blood glucose is lowest.
The obesity epidemic is only 40 years old.
It's easy to make nutrition and weight management sound simple, because one can say weight gain is simply due to eating excessive Calories, but in my 'money making' pursuits in the field, turning off hunger and inappropriate appetite is not so simple, even after nutrition volume and quality are improved. One significant life stressor can stir unhealthy cravings up again.
My clinical experience points to hunger signaling having a very strong psychoemotional stress component that dysregulates endocrine, autonomic, and enteric function....but there are essentially no studies exploring this cascade.


Sounds like you have plenty to keep you busy.

CKinnard wrote:I feel physically weak when I try to do stuff, but that varies throughout the day.



Try deep breathing. Stoichiometry reveals that 20% more oxygen is required for fat metabolism. Your breathing could be calibrated to carbohydrates.
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:10 am

Patt0 wrote:Try deep breathing. Stoichiometry reveals that 20% more oxygen is required for fat metabolism. Your breathing could be calibrated to carbohydrates.


breath depth and rate are primarily controlled by CO2 in the blood, which signal a respiratory center in the brainstem (and pons) to drive breathing.
breathing deeper just reduces CO2 and you respond by breathing less deep than usual for a while.
Oxygen deficit at rest doesn't occur until your blood O2 saturation drops below 85-88%. Most of us have an ample buffer running above 95%.

feeling physically weak when fasting is totally normal, which is why extended exercise is not recommended.

rapunzel
Posts: 59
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:54 pm

Re: Diet Thread

Postby rapunzel » Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:52 am

CKinnard wrote:One significant life stressor can stir unhealthy cravings up again.
My clinical experience points to hunger signaling having a very strong psychoemotional stress component that dysregulates endocrine, autonomic, and enteric function....but there are essentially no studies exploring this cascade.

On the surface, this makes a lot of sense - e.g. limbic system / ANS interactions.

So when are you starting your study? ;)

CKinnard
Posts: 2942
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:20 pm

rapunzel wrote:So when are you starting your study? ;)


:) I started my 'study' 30 years ago.... been observing carefully as a clinician for over 20 years.
As for getting anything published, that's a barrier requiring affiliation with a quality university, as well as hundreds of hours of grant applications.
A study such as I imagine, would also require cooperation between several faculties... I can't imagine something this 'advanced' getting off the ground for at least another 10-15 years. Many don't understand how much current consensus is an inertia that slows scientific progress.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users