torn asunder

oh, FFS...

i'm thinking that i really need to get to work on my car tonight. i'm thinking that i'm looking forward to talking with her again. i'm thinking that i need to find some new methods of social interaction here in town... i'm thinking one other thing, but it's a secret!

wanted to add my b-day wishes as well!

stepping out the door for a run...

thank you - i've been trying to remember that quote!

the power over time... same question...

i feel really bad right now for an ex g/f - she just broke up with her guy last night & isn't doing well. we talked, but i wish i was closer so i could give her a hug. from what i know of the guy though, she's going to be much better off in the long run, it's just so hard to have to go through those kinds of emotions...

isolated - since i decided to not go out anymore, i don't see anyone. all the people i usually hang out with in this town are bar people. there's really only one person i know who doesn't, but i just don't think i can call...

excellent idea! you may find that you won't need to drop it back down, either, and that you'll recover more quickly with a bit more calories!

well, i got a hold of my buddy (and sorry this post will be so long, but he had some good information to share) - here were his questions when i asked about the 12% recommendation you mentioned... (btw, all bolding in this post is mine) First off the idea that no one should get more than 12% of daily calories form protein is an arbitrary number. It doesn’t really help her defend her point. It’s her first mistake. See 12% of a 10000 kcal diet is 1200 kcal – so about 300g or the person could be consuming 2000 kcal (recommended diet of the avg man (75kg)) an d that would be 240 kcal – about 60 g. Big discrepancy there. Is she trying to claim that the kidneys can actually determine the ratio of diet? Because most organs work on a saturation curve (or threshold). They can only handle so much before it spills over and causes problems. If she wants to get technical it needs to be based on g/kg of mass (lean or total) or a threshold value that the kidney can handle. From all of my research I have never seen a value designated to either. he did mention that he's sure you did find articles agreeing with your position, (which i didn't really doubt) - he then cited some articles/research papers that show the opposite. here's the rest of his response, and the cited articles (with sources) As for her finding sources saying it increases risk, well, she will and it will not be hard. But on the other hand I can find tons of sources that say it does not. I stand by what I said in the first portion of my response. Until we know a value of g/kg or threshold value that the kidney can handle, Proteinuria is only a biomark for a diseased kidney, not the cause of it. It means the kidney is not working optimally. (articles/sources) ************************************* Comparison of renal function and other health outcomes in vegetarians versus omnivores in Taiwan. There was no difference in the renal functions between the two groups. However, systolic blood pressure, blood urea nitrogen, serum sodium, glucose, cholesterol levels, and urinary specific gravity were lower in the vegetarian group. Although these results were compatible with general concepts regarding diet of plant origin, after adjusting for age, the duration of intake of this diet had no effect on the renal functions. Based on the findings, it is concluded that the renal functions, in terms of the estimated glomerular filtration rate, were not different between the vegetarians and the omnivores. Check the diff in protein intakes in this study to see if it works 1. Knight EL, Stampfer MJ, Hankinson SE, Spiegelman D, Curhan GC. The impact of protein intake on renal function decline in women with normal renal function or mild renal insufficiency. Ann Intern Med. 2003 Mar 18;138(6):460-7. When comparing the urinary content of ketone between high PRO, low CHO diets to traditional diets the ketone levels were not altered by diet. Both groups exhibited increase in blood urea that was proportional to the protein intake. Overall the data suggested that renal clearance of nitrogen is efficient up to 1.5 g/kg (highest level tested) __________________________________________________ __________ FROM LYLE (McDonald)– (easier to use his words right now.) Kidney function A common criticism of high protein intakes/diets is the concern that they are damaging to the kidneys. This belief seems to stem from the fact that, in individuals with preexisting kidney damage, protein intake often has to be reduced to prevent further development of the disease. Incorrectly, this has been turned around to suggest that high-protein intakes are damaging to the kidneys (1). There is at best a weak case to be made for a risk of high protein intakes on kidney function; quite in fact, some research suggests a beneficial effect of higher protein intakes on kidney function (2). Simply put, the adaptations to kidney function that are often cited as indicating “strain” or damage are more likely to simply be normal adaptive effects of varying protein intake (1). Unfortunately, very little research has directly examined the impact of high protein intakes on kidney function in athletes. One study examined the impact of 2.8 g/kg (1.3 g/lb) protein on the kidney function of bodybuilders, no negative effect was seen (3). To my knowledge, higher intakes have not been studied. Empirically, it’s worth considering that athletes have been habitually consuming large amounts of protein for at least several decades without any reported increase in the incidence of kidney problems. If such a problem were going to occur, it seems likely that it would have shown up by now. While this certainly doesn’t prove that high protein intakes aren’t potentially detrimental to kidney function, the data in support of that idea would seem to be lacking both from a scientific and real-world point of view. Interestingly, while it’s always been stated that high dietary protein intakes increase fluid requirements, this idea appears to have originated from a military study examining nitrogen balance under conditions of water and energy restriction (1). There is no indication that individuals who are sufficiently hydrated need to go out of their way to increase fluid intake when they are consuming large amounts of protein. 1. Martin WF et. al. Dietary protein intake and renal function. Nutr Metab (2005) 2: 25. 2. Millward DJ. Optimal intakes of protein in the human diet. Proc Nutr Soc. (1999) 58(2): 403-13. 3. Poortmans JR and Dellalieux O. Do regular high protein diets have potential health risks on kidney function in athletes? Int J Sport Nutr Exerc Metab. (2000) 10(1):28-38. International Journal of Sport Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, 2006, 16, 129-152 © 2006 Human Kinetics, Inc. A Review of Issues of Dietary Protein Intake in Humans Full text:http://www.humankinetics.com/eJourna.../pdfs/5642.pdf ----- A suggested maximum protein intake based on bodily needs, weight control evidence, and avoiding protein toxicity would be approximately of 25% of energy requirements at approximately 2 to 2.5 g ∙ kg-1 ∙ d-1, corresponding to 176 g protein per day for an 80 kg individual on a 12,000kJ/d (little more than 2800 kcal) diet. This is well below the theoretical maximum safe intake range for an 80 kg person (285 to 365 g/d). __________________________________________________ Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2010 Aug 16. [Epub ahead of print] Acid diet (high-meat protein) effects on calcium metabolism and bone health. Cao JJ, Nielsen FH. USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Grand Forks Human Nutrition Research Center, Grand Forks, North Dakota, USA. Abstract PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Update recent advancements regarding the effect of high-animal protein intakes on calcium utilization and bone health. RECENT FINDINGS: Increased potential renal acid load resulting from a high protein (intake above the current Recommended Dietary Allowance of 0.8 g protein/kg body weight) intake has been closely associated with increased urinary calcium excretion. However, recent findings do not support the assumption that bone is lost to provide the extra calcium found in urine. Neither whole body calcium balance is, nor are bone status indicators, negatively affected by the increased acid load. Contrary to the supposed detrimental effect of protein, the majority of epidemiological studies have shown that long-term high-protein intake increases bone mineral density and reduces bone fracture incidence. The beneficial effects of protein such as increasing intestinal calcium absorption and circulating IGF-I whereas lowering serum parathyroid hormone sufficiently offset any negative effects of the acid load of protein on bone health. SUMMARY: On the basis of recent findings, consuming protein (including that from meat) higher than current Recommended Dietary Allowance for protein is beneficial to calcium utilization and bone health, especially in the elderly. A high-protein diet with adequate calcium and fruits and vegetables is important for bone health and osteoporosis prevention. Dietary protein safety and resistance exercise: what do we really know? Lowery LM, Devia L. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2009 Jan 12;6(1):3. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 19138405 ABSTRACT: Resistance trainers continue to receive mixed messages about the safety of purposely seeking ample dietary protein in their quest for stimulating protein synthesis, improving performance, or maintaining health. Despite protein's lay popularity and the routinely high intakes exhibited by strength athletes, liberal and purposeful protein consumption is often maligned by "experts". University textbooks, instructors, and various forms of literature from personal training groups and athletic organizations continue to use dissuasive language surrounding dietary protein. Due to the widely known health benefits of dietary protein and a growing body of evidence on its safety profile, this is unfortunate. In response, researchers have critiqued unfounded educational messages. As a recent summarizing example, the International Society of Sports Nutrition (ISSN) Position Stand: Protein and Exercise reviewed general literature on renal and bone health. The concluding remark that "Concerns that protein intake within this range [1.4 - 2.0 g/kg body weight per day] is unhealthy are unfounded in healthy, exercising individuals." was based largely upon data from non-athletes due to "a lack of scientific evidence". Future studies were deemed necessary. This assessment is not unique in the scientific literature. Investigators continue to cite controversy, debate, and the lack of direct evidence that allows it. This review discusses the few existing safety studies done specific to athletes and calls for protein research specific to resistance trainers. Population-specific, long term data will be necessary for effective education in dietetics textbooks and from sports governing bodies. Forward Message

yeah, sorry - haven't talked to him in ages, forgot what he was! most of the people i'm talking about are around this level of education. (maybe 3-4 of them.) i can address the machine issue, but it will likely be tomorrow, as i'm slacking off waaaaaay too much at work today!

well, the main guy i was thinking of is a CSEP-CPT Instructor/Examiner – Canadian Society for Exercise Physiology (CSEP and a Certified Kinesiologist – Ontario Kinesiology Association ( OKA ). he really knows his shit. i'm going to run what you've posted by him & get his input. i find it hard to believe, but i'm willing to be educated if i'm wrong.

all i can say to this right now (because i have to get back to work) is that machines really should only be used by individuals who have little to no weightlifting experience. untrained people are likely to lose balance & drop weights, which is why machines can be helpful, but after a while, they can actually be more harmful than anything else. they don't allow for full range of motion, and they don't allow for training of stabilizing musculature. they force the body into predetermined ROMs and can quite easily cause joint misalignments, which are much more likely to cause injury.

here's where you said 12g of protein. if you control the amount of calories you take in, there's *absolutely* no need for 3 hrs of cardio. i'm not rallying anyone against you. i'm asking you to be a little more clear when you make statements about this kind of thing. qualify your remarks with something, because the way you approach this, it's like you're stating irrefutable fact, when that's nowhere near the case. in fact, nothing any one of us says can be considered irrefutable, as there's no definitive evidence one way or another. the fact that you stated something to the affect that "high protein intake is *killing* you from the inside" is ridiculous. i directly challenge you to come up with one study that proves that an adult with healthy organ function and adequate hydration will be harmed by high protein intake. i have several certified trainers/dietitian friends who have been asking for this proof for years, and they'd love to see the evidence. i'll forward it to them as soon as i see it. i'd also be interested in seeing your sources that show protein only helps in building muscle, but that to maintain it requires high amounts of carbs. i'll forward that to them as well.

you are correct in a lot of this! weight training will improve BMR and increase bone strength/density. running/sprinting can do this as well, as can yoga, tai chi, etc... low impact cardio will not improve bone strength much, unless you're doing something to build muscle with it, like climbing hills or something. many studies show that cumulative caloric expenditure daily is as beneficial as one long session, too, so people shouldn't feel that have to make some herculean effort. 10-15 minutes walks, 2-3 times a day, can be as beneficial as one 30-45 minute walk. the key is to be consistent, watch your caloriesin vs. calories out, and keep your diet reasonable and fairly balanced. as for the hour-long weight training, i can assure you that one hour is not difficult to do. the last strength routine i was on would take me a minimum of 1.5 hrs (sometimes up to 1.75 hrs of heavy lifting), after which, i would run(jog) for 30 minutes or so. as i've mentioned several times, it's all dependent on what you're looking to do.

again, it depends on goals. sure muscle burns fat, but so does walking. for that matter, one doesn't even have to lift weights to build up muscle... pushups, situps, pullups, "prisoner" (body-weight) squats, hill sprints, etc. hell, yoga is a great way to strengthen muscle without growing them much. as i said, it all depends on goals. there is no one way to fitness. there are many paths, just pick the one you like the most, make sure it's healthy based on your own research and the input of others, and go for it. it doesn't get much more simple than that...

wow, way to be dismissive of someone. do you understand how muscle hypertrophy works? it requires added resistance *and* a surplus of calories *and* sufficient amounts of protein. you're advocating 12g of protein a day (which, btw, you can get in only half a serving [1/2 cup] of fava beans, or only 3/4 cup of skim milk), which i can guarantee will result in a decrease of muscle mass unless you're engaged in a heavy weight/low rep strength routine. under caloric deficit, the body will get rid of the most metabolically costly tissue, which is muscle. the only way to retain it is to force the body to retain it by using it in a strength routine. where do you get the idea that cardio is not as healthy as weight training? that's an entirely subjective determination, based on the goals of the individual. it may be true for you, but there's no way you can definitively say that. in fact, most of the medical professionals i've interacted with have warned me (and most of my weight-lifting friends) against heavy lifting due to the higher risk of injury (which isn't necessarily true - it's dependent on proper form/technique, not the exercise itself). now, i wouldn't take issue with most of this if you stated these things as your *opinion*. you're not doing that, you're claiming them as fact, which is irresponsible.

only possible way i could buy into this is as a guideline for a sedentary individual. 12% cal. from protein for someone doing any amount of exercise is only going to result in them losing muscle mass from being in a catabolic state, thus decreasing metabolism. as i said before, i'll try to find links in the next day or two (remember, i still can't access dgn from home), but the gist of what i'm saying is that the majority of studies that are/have been done in the recent past have focused either on non-exercised groups, or cardio-only, and have little/nothing to do with weight-trained individuals, which many people tend to go with, and typically, only focused on one specific topic at a time. they are highly specific, and therefore inadequate to *directly* guide someone. they have value, but only within stringent guidelines. sorry for coming across like a jerk.

i don't have anywhere near the time to debunk everything you said, but i can't believe you found evidence of any of this. only 12g protein? you're insane. i'm not even sure i can stand to debate this with you. from all the research i've done, i think you're doing a huge disservice to anyone you choose to give advice to. all i can say right now, until i get time to gather a ton of links, is that anyone who reads any health advice online, should not take any of it (mine included) as gospel but do your own research. oh, and "protein-bars (Liver-failure in a wrapper)"!? can anyone say "drama-queen"? i'm sorry if this sounds rude/harsh, but i really think you have no idea what you're talking about. i'm just... dumbfounded.

disagree. weighted situps/crunches will cause muscular hypertrophy, but unweighted? not likely at all. it takes a hell of a lot of resistance to cause growth in abdominal muscles. again, disagree. from where are you drawing this conclusion? there are many ways to lose weight, even the 'atkins' diet works well *when followed correctly*. anyway, my point is that ideally, aiming for getting calories in any ratio between 33c/33p/33f and 50c/25p/25f should be fine. unless your goal is also losing muscle, you should be getting roughly 0.8-1 gram of protein per lb of lean body mass to maintain muscle(total weight minus body fat). and don't eliminate fat, your body needs a certain amount of fat in order to perform many functions. too low on fat content & you'll actually start becoming *less* healthy. i'll see if i can dig up some of my old links on this topic in a bit here...

heh. well, i wouldn't say "try" except for two things - 1) depends when the family is doing their big meal. unfortunately, it's here in kzoo this year, so i'll have to drive over after - i really can't miss it without causing a huge dramafest. 2) need to get the gas tank replaced on my truck, as i can't fill it much over 1/4 tank without sloshing gas all over the ground. that being said, i'm going to do my best to make it!

avatar-less

umm... anybody mind if i try to show for this part? i never get to see any of you outside the club... this sounds like a lot of fun!