Hack your Endurance with Rhodiola & Ginkgo

Rhodiola and ginkgo combination boosts endurance (no training required)

Supplementation with extracts of Ginkgo biloba and Rhodiola crenulata increases the stamina of young men. This is shown in a human study published in 2009 in the Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine.

Study
The researchers, at the University of Hong Kong, divided 67 young men into 2 groups. For 7 weeks, they gave the men in one group placebo capsules and the men in the other group capsules containing extracts of Ginkgo biloba and Rhodiola crenulata in a ratio of 1: 9.

The men took 4 capsules each day, each containing 270 milligrams of extract mixture. They took 2 capsules with breakfast and 2 capsules with dinner.

Results
The supplement increased the men's stamina. The subjects in the experimental group managed to cycle longer, and that may have been due to the increase in their bodies' ability to absorb oxygen. [VO2max]

rhodiola-rosea-ginkgo-biloba-enduranc3
rhodiola-rosea-ginkgo-biloba-endurance.gif

Supplementation did not affect the test subjects' testosterone levels, but it did prevent cortisol levels from rising after exercise. That may mean that the men recovered faster.

Conclusion
"The present findings have provided evidence supporting the use of Rhodiola crenulata and Ginkgo biloba combined supplement for improving the endurance performance by increasing oxygen consumption and protecting against fatigue", summarize the researchers.

According to Russian animal study, extracts from both plants improve endurance, albeit in different ways. [Bull Exp Biol Med. 2003 Dec;136(6):585-7.]

Women and Men respond similarly to strength trianing

Women's upper body muscles respond to strength training just as well as men's

The extent to which women can strengthen the muscles in their upper body through strength training is the same as the extent to which men can do this. However, this does not imply that women can easily reach the strength level of men who work out.

Study
In 2016, Brazilian sports scientist Paulo Gentil published a study in which he got 44 male and 47 female students to do a full-body workout twice a week for 10 weeks.

The workout consisted of basic exercises such as leg press, leg curl, chest press and lat pulldown. The subjects did 3 sets of each exercise with a weight that allowed for 8-12 repetitions. The subjects rested for 2 minutes between sets.

Before and after the training period, the researchers determined the torque that the test subjects could develop during a biceps curl. 'Torque' is what athletes in the gym often refer to as 'force'.

Results
In absolute terms, the men gained more strength than the women [left in the figure below]. But in relative terms, in terms of progression over the strength already present before the training program began, the progression of the men was similar to that of the women [bottom right].

strength-training-women-men-upper-body.gif

Conclusion
"Despite the physiological and hormonal differences between sexes, women demonstrated the same relative strength gains compared to men [...]", writes Gentil.

"It appears there is presently no evidence of a need to design different resistance training protocols to men and women. [...] One should not expect to find limitations in upper body strength development in women."


Glutathione Info and Supplementation Tips

Glutathione is critical in the management of your voltage. When an electron donor gives up its electrons, the donor can become a stealer. Glutathione readily supplies the electrons to restore your electron donor to its donor status so it can help again.

Glutathione is not significantly absorbed from the gut, so taking it doesn’t help. However, it is made in every cell in the body by assembling the amino acids cysteine, glycine, and glutamine. Thus the key is for you to be sure to consume those amino acids.

Glutathione has multiple functions:

  1. It is the major antioxidant produced by the cells, participating directly in the neutralization of free radicals and reactive oxygen compounds, as well as maintaining exogenous antioxidants such as vitamins C and E in their reduced (electron donor) forms.

  2. It detoxifies many foreign compounds and carcinogens, both organic and inorganic.

  3. It is essential for the immune system to exert its full potential, e.g.:

    • Modulating antigen presentation to lymphocytes, thereby influencing cytokine production and type of response (cellular or humoral) that develops

    • Enhancing proliferation of lymphocytes thereby increasing magnitude of response

    • Enhancing killing activity of cytotoxic T cells and NK cells

    • Regulating apoptosis, thereby maintaining control of the immune response

  4. It plays a fundamental role in numerous metabolic and biochemical reactions such as DNA synthesis and repair, protein synthesis, prostaglandin synthesis, amino acid transport, and enzyme activation. Thus every system in the body can be affected by the state of the glutathione system, especially the immune system, the nervous system, the gastrointestinal system, and the lungs.

  5. It is necessary for converting T4 to T3 (thyroid hormones). It is also necessary to transfer electrons from the cell membrane to the mitochondria.

Supplementing has been difficult, as research suggests that glutathione taken orally is not well absorbed across the gastrointestinal tract. In a study of acute oral administration of a very large dose (3 grams) of oral glutathione, Witschi and coworkers found that “it is not possible to increase circulating glutathione to a clinically beneficial extent by the oral administration of a single dose of 3g of glutathione.”

However, plasma and liver glutathione concentrations can be raised by oral administration of S-adenosylmethionine (SAMe), glutathione precursors rich in cysteine include N-acetylcysteine (NAC) and whey protein, and these supplements have been shown to increase glutathione content within the cell.

N-acetylcysteine is available both as a drug and as a generic supplement. Alpha lipoic acid has also been shown to restore intracellular glutathione. Melatonin has been shown to stimulate a related enzyme, glutathione peroxidase, and silymarin, an extract of the seeds of the milk thistle plant (Silybum marianum) has also demonstrated an ability to replenish glutathione levels.

Top 9 Food Myths

Myth #1: Eating fat will make you fat.

Truth: It’s true that fat is denser in calories than carbohydrates and proteins (more than twice the calories per gram), but obesity is not primarily due to an excess of calories consumed. It is the type of calories consumed that is important. Recent science shows that most surplus weight and obesity is caused by excess carbohydrates in the diet. Fats are a main source of energy. They are also an important source of fat-soluble vitamins and provide much of the pleasurable flavor and texture in food. Some (the omega fats) are, in fact, essential in our diet, as we can’t produce our own.


Myth #2: Saturated fats are bad for your heart.

Truth: There has never been any robust, conclusive evidence that saturated fats cause chronic disease. In fact, saturated fats are the cleanest-burning fuel you can put in your body. From a health perspective, saturated fats are not only benign, they’re beneficial.

Myth #3: Carbohydrates are essential to our bodies.

Truth: There are no essential carbohydrates. Your body evolved to make its own blood glucose from non-carbohydrate sources. When it does so, it makes the optimum amount for the present needs of the body. There are beneficial carbohydrates—soluble and insoluble fibers—but you can get plenty of these without also burdening your body with sugars and starch.

Myth #4: Gluten-free eating is the healthiest option.

Truth: If you have celiac disease or are gluten sensitive, by all means avoid gluten in your diet. Otherwise, keep in mind that most processed, gluten-free foods use substitutes like rice flour, potato starch, and tapioca flour. These and other starches rapidly raise blood glucose and insulin, aggravating diabetes and other chronic diseases. Gluten-free does not mean low-carbohydrate. In fact, it’s sometimes quite the opposite.

Myth #5: Everything in moderation.

Truth: To quote Canadian physician Dr. Jay Wortman, “Everything in moderation is an excuse we use to eat the things we shouldn’t eat.” Like the notion of a “balanced diet,” “everything in moderation” gives us license to trade off nutritious calories for empty ones. This is doubly dangerous when that junk food contains sugar, which activates the opiate receptors in our brain, stimulating our reward center. Each time we eat something sweet, we’re reinforcing those neuropathways and hardwiring our brains to crave the stuff. So, next time you catch yourself using “moderation” and “balance” as a rationale to consume foods you know are bad for you, it helps to remember that you’re not only fooling yourself, you’re compromising your health in the process.

Myth #6: To lose weight, you need to cut calories.

Truth: Cutting calories means you eat less food, and eating less food means you have less of an opportunity to meet daily nutritional requirements. If you are restricting calories to less than your daily needs, you will not only be perpetually hungry, but you will also reduce your metabolic rate, making weight loss more difficult. What’s more, once you return to your regular diet, there is a high probability that you will regain the weight you lost and are likely to put on even more.

Myth #7: Fruit is good for you because it’s natural.

Truth: Newsflash: fruit did not evolve to be a health food. Its evolutionary imperative is to spread its seeds, and the best way to do that is to get animals to eat it, move on, and deposit the seeds, some distance away, embedded in a healthy dollop of fertilizer. Sweet fruit is more attractive to animals—including humans—so job well done on the dispersal-system front. But the sweetness comes at a high cost not only in terms of high-carbohydrate starches but also fructose—a known toxin. The same goes for honey and maple syrup. Don’t be persuaded to buy and eat food simply because it’s considered natural.


Myth #8: All vegetables are created equal.

Truth: Many vegetables—especially root vegetables, beans, and grains (and, yes, I include grains as vegetables because they are plants)—are high in starch and can contribute to obesity and insulin resistance. Choose wisely.

Myth #9: If you work out, you can eat whatever you want.

Truth: Working out does burn calories, so your food intake should increase proportionally. However, science tells us that about 80 percent of weight management is determined by what you eat, not how many calories you burn. You lose weight in the kitchen; you get fit in the gym. If you eat poorly, exercise will not help you outrun the negative health consequences.

via The Bio Diet

Book Thoughts - Regenerate by Sayer Ji

Book Thoughts - Regenerate by Sayer Ji

TL;DR Challenging the standard of practice, pill-for-every-ill approach to healthcare, Sayer Ji dives into the history of how the modern medical establishment came to be, as well as explores the alternative to the “sickcare” system by looking into ways of optimizing health through holistic practices and functional medicine tactics, rather than managing illness.

Social Engineering Your Health

In the early part of the 20th century, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie, and their biggest of baller friends believed that society was overflowing with less than desirable people — “feeble minded”, physically defective, disease ridden, and everyone generally from a lower station that didn’t make for good workers. So, they decided to implement a program of systemic change called, “eugenics.”

The purpose of eugenics was to eliminate bad genes from the gene pool, in an effort to create a better society. In other words, reduce the population of undesirable people. The approach and philosophy of eugenics was to incorporate all means possible to elevate desirable traits in humans, while decreasing those with undesirable ones. Unfortunately, that meant killing off people that didn’t measure up to the standard, or at least keep them from procreating. That included diseases, chemical sterilization, pacification through lifestyle modifications, and anything else that provided them with the leverage necessary to carry out their ideological plan. 

Led by the Rockefeller Foundation’s Science of Man Project, the Ford Foundation, and the Carnegie Foundation, they made no secrets about their beliefs or intentions, as they openly talked about their contempt for the common man. They influenced government policy, set up medical research institutions among other things. Rockefeller and Carnegie poured money into Caltech, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Columbia, and the University of Chicago to study how best to reengineer man. 

They pursued their agenda in full view of the public for decades, until the term fell out of favor. The term “eugenics” was tarnished after discovering the atrocities carried about by Germany in WWII. Never faded, Rockefeller & Friends decided to rebrand. Eugenics became known as “social engineering.” Sound familiar?

The influence of the policies laid out by Rockefeller & Friends during the early part of the 20th century set the bar for the system we currently find ourselves in. Although the message is never relayed truthfully, it’s hard to deny the institution of large scale massive control that sucks the health, life, and liberty out of everyone you know. Straining the financial stability of all and weakening the solidarity of the masses through things like the promise of vaccinations, social distancing, social tracking, weaponizing fear, the continual dumbing down of people with immediate gratification, destruction of immune systems through the promotion of inflammatory diets, and no mention of how to improve health other than wearing a mask, stay quite, and stay inside, all seems like it fits the narrative of “social engineering.” But maybe I’m crazy. 

The same protocols implemented in the early 20th century can be seen today:

  • Diseases; metabolic disease, cardiovascular disease, and the RONA.

  • Chemical sterilization; pollution of our air, water, and food, evidenced by our catastrophic drop in fertility rates over the 50 years.

  • Pacification through lifestyle; panem et circenses.

Research Bias: Be Careful Where You Place Your Trust

Industry funding is a major impediment to unbiased results when it comes to testing new methodologies and pharmaceutical drug interventions, as analyses have shown that industry-sponsored trials report positive outcomes significantly more often than trials financially backed by the government, nonprofits, or nonfederal organizations.1 In a publication, bias known as the “file drawer” phenomenon, negative and null trials, or results that are unfavorable to drugs are more likely to be suppressed.2 There is also widespread rigging of data—deliberate manipulation of outcomes and use of statistical sleight-of-hand—wherein the outcomes of trials are being corrupted by commercial interests.3 And then there is the issue of industry bribery of journal editors. One retrospective observational study revealed that 50.6 percent of journal editors accept payments from industry sources, with an average payment of $28,136 and some payments approaching half a million dollars, meaning that the editors of the most influential journals in the world, who steer the scientific dialogue, are effectively on the take.4 In addition, a 2007 national survey published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that 94 percent of physicians had ties to the pharmaceutical industry, with physicians receiving free meals, reimbursement for medical education or professional meetings, consulting, lecturing, and enrolling patients in clinical trials.5

  1. Florence T. Bourgeois, Srinivas Murthy, and Kenneth D. Mandl, “Outcome Reporting among Drug Trials Registered in ClinicalTrials.gov,” Annals of Internal Medicine 153, no. 3 (2010): 158–66, https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-153-3-201008030-00006.

  2. Erick H. Turner et al., “Selective Publication of Antidepressant Trials and Its Influence on Apparent Efficacy,” New England Journal of Medicine 358, no. 3 (2008): 252–60, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa065779.

  3. John P. A. Ioannidis, “Why Most Published Research Findings Are False,” PLoS Medicine 2, no. 8 (2005): e124, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124; and Alex Hern and Pamela Duncan, “Predatory Publishers: The Journals That Churn Out Fake Science,” The Guardian, August 10, 2018, www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/aug/10/predatory-publishers-the-journals-who-churn-out-fake-science.

  4. Jessica J. Liu et al., “Payments by US Pharmaceutical and Medical Device Manufacturers to US Medical Journal Editors: Retrospective Observational Study,” BMJ 359 (October 26, 2017): j4619, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4619.

  5. Eric G. Campbell et al., “A National Survey of Physician-Industry Relationships,” New England Journal of Medicine 356, no. 17 (2007):1742–50, https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsa064508.)

The Physical Power of Thought

What you think about is important, not only in life, but training as well, because it literally has the power to manifest physical change. As I’ve said before, bodybuilders are the original “biohackers” as they are always looking for ways to push the boundaries of what is possible and consistently improve their performance. It is from their tireless effort that we get the mind/muscle connection, or thinking about the muscle helps it grow exponentially more than just placing it under tension alone.

Why?

It comes down to the fact that the mind is the sum total of the central nervous system functioning, whereby its endocrine secretion is called a thought. That secretion can directly affect cellular activity and protein formation, which, very simply, means a thought has a tangible action. It may sound woo but there is research to back it up. 

A study reported in the New Scientist entitled Mental Gymnastics Increase Bicep Strength took ten volunteers and asked them to imagine flexing one of their biceps as hard as they could for five times a week. The researchers recorded electrical brain activity during the participants sessions and assessed their muscular strength every two weeks. Those who only imagined flexing, increased their biceps strength by 13.5% in just a few weeks, compared to the control group.1

The power of thought can go a long way. Take a look at another study published in the Journal of Neurophysiology that had subjects divided into three groups. The first was asked to exercise by contracting and relaxing one finger on their hand for five sixty-minute training sessions a week for four weeks. A second group, following the same training schedule, was instructed to only mentally rehearse the same exercises, without physically activating any muscle in their finger. The control group neither thought about, nor exercised their finger outside of their daily routines. At the end of the study, researchers found that the group who actually did the the physical exercises exhibited a 30% gain in strength over the control group. No shit, right?! Well, the crazy part is that the second group, who only mentally rehearsed the exercises, demonstrated a 22% increase in muscle strength over the control group!2 The mind produced a quantifiable affect on the body. 

None of this is meant to say that simply thinking about an outcome is going to be a substitute for doing the work, but that if you combine both intent and physical effort you can create the best outcome. 

—————————-

1. Cohen, Philip, “Mental gymnastics increase bicep strength.” New Scientist (21 November 2001)

2. Yue, G., and K. J. Cole, “Strength increases from the motor program: comparison of training with maximal voluntary and imagined muscle contractions.” Journal of Neurophysiology, vol. 67(5): 1114–1123 (1992)