Tony Gentilcore doesn’t go gentle on Soy:

OK, I’m responding to this late.  In the September Issue of Scientific American there is an Article entitled, “Can Fat be Fit?”

As you’d expect, they answer “no.”  The article is in response to a very well publicised and horribly flawed study done by Katherine M. Flegal, a researcher at the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention.  She did a Statistical analysis of mortality rates of obese people verses people at a “healthy” weight.  She concluded that obese people had LOWER mortality rates than the people in healthy range.  And that, in turn, got a whole bunch of idiots who don’t know the first thing about the health sciences exited (I’m sure for monetary reasons) to write books and articles spouting off about how the medical establishment is all wrong, and being fat is wonderful.

Here are some key points:

 Flegal’s work didn’t factor out smokers and those with chronic illnesses.  That is, the thin people weren’t healthy to begin with.

Professor Meir Stampfer, a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health says (of Flegal’s research and the corresponding hoopla), “It’s complete nonsense, and it’s obviously complete nonsense, and it’s very easy to explain why some people have gone astray … when you get sick, you lose weight, and you die.”

Another researcher, James A. Greenberg, did a similar statistical analysis.  Except that he DID account for other unrelated health factors and found that those who were Obese had 3 times the mortality rate of those who were of “healthy” weight.

If your BMI rises from 20 to 25 your risk of Diabetes quadruples.  If it goes past 30, your risk increases 30-60 fold … that’s not a typo!

The three factors you should look at (according to Dr. Wilett, a collegue of Professor Stampfer) are:

1. keeping your BMI within the range of 20-24.9 (I’m a little uncomfortable with BMI, but it’s better than nothing)
2. getting you weight to what it was when you were 20 years old (assuming you weren’t fat when you were 20).
3. Getting your waist circumference down to what it was when you were 20

Clearly those last few rely on you being within “healthy” range when you were 20.  For younger generations, this is becoming less and less possible.  20 year olds today are WAY fatter than they should be, on average.

As for my uncomfortable-ness  with the BMI:  it doesn’t take into account muscle.  ALL of my routines (and the routines of any good trainer) are designed to put a lot of muscle on my clients.  This has a few major effects.

1. Their metabolism goes way up
2. they are able to complete daily tasks easier and with a lower risk of injury
3.  Dieting becomes easier
4. They look more shapely, better.

And that last one is part of the point isn’t it?  Whether we like to admit it or not, most of us want to look as healthy as we are.  It isn’t the main point, but it’s there.  The simple fact is, it’s really not that complicated to have both a healthy body and a healthy look.  Just workout a lot, do intervals, and stop eating crap.

My routines are designed with maximum results in mind.  But, anything is better than nothing, and the ridiculous response to Flegal’s research leads to more people believing that they are not damaging their health by being fat, when in fact they are.  And that is irresponsible.

Alwyn  Cosgrove posted a list compiled by Jimmy Smith of the 25 best reasons to drink Green tea.

Here’s my favorite:

21. Green Tea and Herpes
Green tea increases the effectiveness of topical interferon treatment of herpes. First green tea compress is applied, and then let the skin dry before the interferon treatment.

It was long believed that after your youth was gone, your brain stopped going through neurogenesis, that is, stopped “getting smarter.”

From NYT:

Conventional wisdom had long held that animal (and human) brains weren’t malleable: after a brief window early in life, the brain could no longer grow or renew itself …

Gage’s mice proved otherwise. Before being euthanized, the animals had been injected with a chemical compound that incorporates itself into actively dividing cells. During autopsy, those cells could be identified by using a dye. Gage and his team presumed they wouldn’t find such cells in the mice’s brain tissue, but to their astonishment, they did. Up until the point of death, the mice were creating fresh neurons. Their brains were regenerating themselves.

All of the mice showed this vivid proof of what’s known as “neurogenesis,” or the creation of new neurons. But the brains of the athletic mice in particular showed many more. These mice, the ones that scampered on running wheels, were producing two to three times as many new neurons as the mice that didn’t exercise.

2 or 3 times!  There’s more:

This spring, neuroscientists at Columbia University in New York City published a study in which a group of men and women, ranging in age from 21 to 45, began working out for one hour four times a week. After 12 weeks, the test subjects, predictably, became more fit. Their VO2 max, the standard measure of how much oxygen a person takes in while exercising, rose significantly.

But something else happened as a result of all those workouts: blood flowed at a much higher volume to a part of the brain responsible for neurogenesis. Functional M.R.I.’s showed that a portion of each person’s hippocampus received almost twice the blood volume as it did before. Scientists suspect that the blood pumping into that part of the brain was helping to produce fresh neurons. …

Those with the biggest increases in VO2 max had the best scores of all.

AKA, the wimpy training you get from those “Globo Gym” trainers isn’t really gonna do you as much good as a solid, and truly tough routine.

Train Hard, Get Smart!

The researchers also found that higher levels of aerobic fitness corresponded to better standardized test scores among a set of Illinois public school students.

PE class is absolutely essential to a thriving student body … but it has to be a class dedicated to actual exercise, not the ridiculous junk that most PE classes are in practice.

Gage, by the way, exercises just about every day, as do most colleagues in his field. Scott Small at Columbia, for instance , likes nothing better than a strenuous game of tennis. “As a neurologist,” he explains, “I constantly get asked at cocktail parties what someone can do to protect their mental functioning. I tell them, ‘Put down that glass and go for a run.’ ”

An Article in Olympic Coach Magazine suggests that grit, or the ability to work hard and consistently over the long haul, is equally (and in some cases more) important than talent for individuals seeking to become successful in their field of interest.

Grit is perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Grit entails working strenuously toward challenges, maintaining both effort and interest over years and years—despite failure, adversity, and even just stalls in progress. The gritty individual approaches achievement as a marathon; his advantage is stamina. Whereas disappointment or boredom signals to others that it is time to change trajectory and cut losses, the gritty individual stays the course.

This seems obvious to anyone who takes seriously the children’s story about the Tortoise and the Hare. We all know that the Tortoise won. And we know why. He didn’t work hard for just one moment and then get lazy. He consistently worked within the bounds of his capacity, never gave up, and always stayed focussed on his goal. The far more naturally talented Hare didn’t have grit, and he lost.

As a trainer, I can tell you that talent doesn’t mean a thing if you don’t use it. Some of my most successful athletes started at the bottom of the talent pool. But, they have a work drive that is staggering.

Check out this “grit” test, and see where you are and where you could improve.

UPDATE:  Turns out the aforementioned “grit” test doesn’t actually give you a result, but simply sends in your info for the study … still interesting though.

Jesse Marunde’s passing was a shock.  And it always is when a young vibrant Elite level Athlete suddenly dies while doing what we all know is good for us: Exercising.

So, what happened to him?  We don’t know yet.  But, here’s an article from the CrossFit Journal about a condition called “Rhabdomyolysis.”  It is …

a breakdown of muscle cell contents that results in the release of muscle fiber contents into the bloodstream.

This is bad.  And the elevated levels of potassium in the system of the victim can stop ones heart (and worse).   Clearly taking anyone beyond their own capacities is a recipe for trouble.

For those of us who are not professional athletes, it’s easy to listen to our minds telling us to slow down or stop.  Our pain threshold is acting like a safety valve.

But, for an elite athlete, listening to the pain telling you to stop is akin to conceding victory.  So, though it is remarkably rare, this may be the reason we tend to see it in athletes.

Always work hard, but only within the bounds of your current capacity.  Hard is a relative word.

The author used the word “mindful” and I will repeat it.  Be Mindful of yourself.  That is the first step towards success an any endeavor.  Fitness is no exception.

A somewhat surprising find by the researchers at the UCLA Medical School was that Marijuana not only doesn’t increase cancer risk, but may in fact reduce it.

Tashkin’s group at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA had hypothesized that marijuana would raise the risk of cancer on the basis of earlier small human studies, lab studies of animals and the fact that marijuana users inhale more deeply and generally hold smoke in their lungs longer than tobacco smokers — exposing them to the dangerous chemicals for a longer time. In addition, Tashkin said, previous studies found that marijuana tar has 50 percent higher concentrations of chemicals linked to cancer than tobacco cigarette tar.

And yet they found that in spite of all of that, marijuana didn’t increase cancer risk.

Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous.

I suspect that the fact that cigarettes also contain a myriad of other chemicals and agents other than tobacco adds to their negative effect.  Marijuana by contrast is generally smoked “pure”.

As an athletic coach, I would have a hard time advocating the use of marijuana, primarily because of its’ estrogen promoting effects.  But, if it’s between that and cigarettes (or Printers):  Marijuana wins.

I’m not joking.  Laser Printers are on par with Cigarettes.

I don’t know what to make of this one:

Data gathered in large cohort studies suggested that current smokers had a 77% lower risk for Parkinson’s disease compared with never smokers, the investigators wrote in the July issue of the Archives of Neurology.

The protective effect of smoking increased with pack-years smoked, and decreased with years since quitting.

“Our data support a dose-dependent reduction of Parkinson’s disease risk associated with cigarette smoking and potentially with other types of tobacco use, they wrote. “Importantly, effects seemed not to be influenced by sex or education.”

I wouldn’t advise that you start smoking, considering the other effects it has (ones that are FAR more common than Parkinson’s).  But, the data is interesting.  And it makes one wonder what exactly it is in cigarettes that IS aiding in the battle against Parkinson’s, and can we extract it so that the harmful effects of smoking can be avoided?

(hat tip:  Andrew Sullivan)

The tingle makes us feel like we’re doing something good for the wound, but it doesn’t work.