Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
One of the best examples of the many types of refined carbohydrates is refined flour.  Flour is essentially a grain, seed, nut, vegetable, fruit, or root that has been machine ground into a relatively fine powder.  One of the most common types of flour in North America, Europe, Northern Africa and the Middle East, and the type we use to make most of our bread, cereal, noodles, and pastry, is wheat flour.  Wheat flour started out as wheat grain, and in its whole grain form, wheat can be described as a concentrated source of vitamins, minerals, fiber, carbohydrate and protein.  Once a wheat grain has had its bran and germ removed, been milled between two stone or steel wheels, and been “bleached,” it becomes something altogether different.  Refined white flour has a particular effect on our bodies, and although it started out as wheat grain, research is now suggesting that the digestion of white flour is unnatural, and can have several damaging effects on the human body. 

Another common form of refined carbohydrate is sugar.  Sugar has a profound effect on the body similar to flour.  Refining sugar from sugar cane, beets, or corn can allow the delivery of a high amount of very simple carbohydrates to the body.  Sugar is a popular ingredient in many different types of foods throughout the world, and as an additive, it is hard to avoid ingesting in our modern dietary culture.

White rice also starts off as a healthy grain with fiber, vitamins, minerals and “complexity,” but the refinement process removes the husk and bran from the grain, and then “polishes” the remaining portion to create simple, refined white rice. 

Many current studies that have been conducted on the effects of ingesting refined carbohydrates, and the results demonstrate some seriously negative effects. To begin, refined carbohydrates produce higher levels of oxidative stress (stress within the body that produces free radicals, and damages cellular tissues).  This stress can lead to cancer, hypertension, and heart disease (due to high levels of blood triglycerides and inflammation on the interior walls of the arteries).  Refined carbohydrates are also considered to be one of the primary causes of type 2 diabetes and obesity.  In their refined state, these carbohydrate types are digested rapidly, causing a spike in blood sugar, followed by a crash.  This “rollercoaster ride” in your blood sugar levels causes excess weight gain, and eventually metabolic syndrome, aka, insulin resistance. Insulin resistance is a condition in which the body cannot use insulin effectively. Insulin is needed to help control the amount of sugar in the body. As a result, blood sugar and fat levels rise even more.  Refined carbohydrates cause blood levels of triglycerides to rise 50 percent more than complex carbohydrates. Generally, a spare tire and rising insulin levels are often the first signs that your risk for heart attack, stroke, and diabetes in increasing. 

The simple act of refining a carbohydrate for the purposes of flavor, preservation, delivery, or appearance can make you fat, diabetic, and ruin the health of your cardiovascular system.  That slice of bread, bowl of rice, or piece of candy should be regarded as a foreign foodstuff that your body does not play well with, and this form of nutrient should be avoided and replaced whenever possible. 


www.formandfunctiontraining.com
2
Yes, thats another great example...anyone who's ever rolled their IT bands knows how rough it can be, but necessary none the less...
3
Information sourced from BMJ:

White rice consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis and systematic review

Correspondence to: Qi Sun qisun@hsph.harvard.edu

Abstract

Objectives To summarise evidence on the association between white rice consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes and to quantify the potential dose-response relation.

Design Meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.

Data sources Searches of Medline and Embase databases for articles published up to January 2012 using keywords that included both rice intake and diabetes; further searches of references of included original studies.

Study selection Included studies were prospective cohort studies that reported risk estimates for type 2 diabetes by rice intake levels.

Data synthesis Relative risks were pooled using a random effects model; dose-response relations were evaluated using data from all rice intake categories in each study.

Results Four articles were identified that included seven distinct prospective cohort analyses in Asian and Western populations for this study. A total of 13 284 incident cases of type 2 diabetes were ascertained among 352 384 participants with follow-up periods ranging from 4 to 22 years. Asian (Chinese and Japanese) populations had much higher white rice consumption levels than did Western populations (average intake levels were three to four servings/day versus one to two servings/week). The pooled relative risk was 1.55 (95% confidence interval 1.20 to 2.01) comparing the highest with the lowest category of white rice intake in Asian populations, whereas the corresponding relative risk was 1.12 (0.94 to 1.33) in Western populations (P for interaction=0.038). In the total population, the dose-response meta-analysis indicated that for each serving per day increment of white rice intake, the relative risk of type 2 diabetes was 1.11 (1.08 to 1.14) (P for linear trend<0.001).

Conclusion Higher consumption of white rice is associated with a significantly increased risk of type 2 diabetes, especially in Asian (Chinese and Japanese) populations.
4
Information sourced from Cardiosource:

Journal Scan Summary

Title:  Sweetened Beverage Consumption, Incident Coronary Heart Disease and Biomarkers of Risk in Men

Date Posted:  March 15, 2012

Authors:  de Koning L, Malik VS, Kellog MD, Rimm EB, Willett WC, Hu FB.

Citation:  Circulation 2012;Mar 12:[Epub ahead of print]. [Free full-text Circulation article PDF] [PubMed® abstract]

Study Question:

Sugar-sweetened beverage consumption is associated with weight gain and risk of type 2 diabetes. What is the relationship with coronary heart disease (CHD), or intermediate biomarkers, and sugar and artificially sweetened beverages?

Methods:

The authors performed an analysis of the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, a prospective cohort study including 42,883 men. Participants reported their usual intake (never to ≥6 times per day) of a standard 12 ounce serving of sugar-sweetened beverages, including juices and artificially-sweetened beverages. Incident CHD was defined as fatal and nonfatal myocardial infarction, which was examined using proportional hazard models.

Results:

At baseline, participants reported consuming less sugar-sweetened beverages (2.5/week; 0.36/day; standard deviation [SD] = 0.61) than artificially sweetened beverages (3.4/week; 0.49/day, SD = 0.94). Consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages was associated with a higher prevalence of current smoking, and a lower quality diet and lower physical activity. Artificially sweetened beverages were associated with an overall better quality diet. There were 3,683 CHD cases over 22 years of follow-up. Participants in the top quartile of sugar-sweetened beverage intake had a 20% higher relative risk of CHD than those in the bottom quartile (relative risk [RR], 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09-1.33; p for trend < 0.01) after adjusting for age, smoking, physical activity, alcohol, multivitamins, family history, diet quality, energy intake, body mass index, pre-enrollment weight change, and dieting. Artificially sweetened beverage consumption was not significantly associated with CHD (multivariate RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.93-1.12; p for trend = 0.28). Adjustment for self-reported high cholesterol, high triglycerides, high blood pressure, and diagnosed type 2 diabetes slightly attenuated these associations. Intake of sugar sweetened, but not artificially sweetened beverages was significantly associated with increased triglycerides, C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor receptors 1 and 2, decreased high-density lipoprotein, lipoprotein(a), and leptin (p values < 0.02).

Conclusions:

The authors concluded that consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages was associated with increased risk of CHD and some adverse changes in lipids, inflammatory factors, and leptin. Artificially sweetened beverage intake was not associated with CHD risk or biomarkers.

Perspective:

What is the practical application of the data? For each additional serving per day, sugar-sweetened beverage consumption was associated with a 19-25% increased risk of CHD (p < 0.02). Similar results were found in the Nurses’ Health Study, where one serving per day increase in sugar-sweetened beverage intake was associated with a 15% increase in risk. Both studies also showed an increase in inflammatory biomarkers with fructose, known to be the worst offender.

Author:

Melvyn Rubenfire, M.D., F.A.C.C. (Disclosure)

Topic:

Prevention/Vascular, General Cardiology, Biomarkers

© 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation
5
Do you have a recipe for that squash spaghetti?
6
General Discussion / Re: Summer Outdoor Bootcamp
« Last post by JaymesonAnderson on March 25, 2012, 07:35:39 PM »
Yes!  Message me for details
7
General Discussion / Re: Summer Outdoor Bootcamp
« Last post by Josh on March 21, 2012, 08:34:43 PM »
Will this happen again this year?
8
I also like to do Spaghetti Squash & Turkey Meatballs to fulfill that pasta itch!
9
A lot of current, young athletes who have access to upper level recovery aids will readily pop a pill, undergo long bouts of myofacial release (deep tissue massage), hop in an ice tub, sit in the cryosauna, etc, in an effort to reduce inflammation after a bout of exercise/training. They have become addicted to enhanced recovery, and erasing, as quickly as possible, the pain, fatigue, and inflammation that naturally come from a hard workout. This has been the practice for some time now; attempting to speed up the recovery process in order to gain the competitive edge.  This would allow practicing/training more often in a set amount of time, and therefore better gains...theoretically. 

The findings of several recent studies suggest otherwise. In 2006, at Chukyo U. in Japan, a study was published in which the athletes who took ice baths (to reduce inflammation) made smaller strength gains than those who recovered naturally. The ice/cold water constricts the blood vessels, and restricts the amount of nutrient rich blood that would normally flow to damaged tissues, and therefore, the muscles recovered slower, and overall less than the participants who recovered naturally.  The University of Queensland found that endurance athletes taking anti-oxidant supplements (taken due to the high amount of oxygen they use to produce fuel, see "free radicals") were actually delaying muscular recovery more than helping.  Several studies based on recovery and Anti-inflamatory's such as ibuprofen and aspirin are showing that long term use of these pills is actually slowing the relief of nagging pain, and reducing overall tissue adaptation. 

Stress is a good thing.  Damage (not to be confused with injury) and inflammation are natural and necessary for recovery and growth.  Inflammation is a process that occurs after particular exercise stress has damaged tissue, and white blood cells flood the area to begin restructuring the affected area.  If this inflammation is left to run its course (assuming proper rest and nutrition are accounted for), then the tissue will not only heal, but become stronger than it was previously as part of our body's miraculous way of adapting to perceived bouts of re-occurring stress in the future.  Efforts to reduce this inflammation might actually be inhibiting strength gains (extreme stress outside of normal levels may qualify differently). 

Next time you really go for it in your workout, try not to cheat the process, but rather embrace it...deal with the soreness, don't take painkillers or hop in the tub...just rest, eat proper nutrients, and when recovered, your return bout should see your body's improvements at work.

www.formandfunctiontraining.com
10
General Discussion / Re: Special K Challenge
« Last post by JaymesonAnderson on March 07, 2012, 01:54:23 PM »
The challenge sounds like a version of a calorie restricted diet (not a carb and fat restricted diet). Have you measured your protein intake to make sure its between .6 and .8 grams of protein per pound of bodyweight per day?  This plans sounds like a marketing trick that helps the participants drop "weight" and not necessarily "fat."  My only concern is that your eating mostly special k (processed simple carbs, low fiber, low protein, and containing hydrogenated/trans fats), and that a portion of the weight you're losing might be muscle and water, not fat alone.  I would use this plan as a jump start to a healthy and balanced dieting style, but I wouldn't make this a permanent eating style.  If you lose muscular tissue, you will lose your current metabolic rate, and you could wind up gaining the weight back AFTER purchasing and eating lots of Kelloggs products. 

My recommendation is to follow the meal plan I assigned you.  It has adequate protein, complex/raw carbohydrate sources, and heart healthy fats.  You might not get an immediate result comparable to the 6 week challenge, but fat (not general weight loss) is assured over time and permanent in nature...not to mention much healthier.  There is, unfortunately, no quick fix solution to fat loss that I've ever heard of.  Juice fasts, crash diets, commercial diets, starvation, pills, etc will only leave you with regret after the initial loss of general weight (again, not fat weight).  You need to make and maintain healthy changes that will last your entire life, including the time you spend pregnant if you choose to have another child...

www.formandfunctiontraining.com
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10