• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

The Official Health and Fitness Thread

I would hope so with Cancer and have some dollars invested in a cure coming out ot Australia.
However it has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that big oil spent decades on supressing any other form of energy production that would lessen their grip on the sector.
Even today with the dropping oil prices one would think this will not be helping the wind/solar sectors.
 
Re: Vitamin D study (Sports Medicine): as per athletes & body mass composition

"Excess body fat or obesity is known to increase risk of poor vitamin D status in nonathletes but it is not known if this is the case in athletes. Furthermore, the reason for this association is not understood, but is thought to be due to either sequestration of the fat-soluble vitamin within adipose tissue or the effect of volume dilution related to obese individuals' larger body size."

...results suggest that athletes with a large body size and/or excess adiposity may be at higher risk for vitamin D insufficiency and deficiency."

...the research concluded: "In addition, the significant association between serum 25(OH)D concentration and fat mass in the mixed model, which remained after controlling for sex, is in support of vitamin D sequestration rather than volume dilution as an explanation for such association."



http://www.lef.org/news/lefdailynews?NewsID=23842&Section=Vitamins
 
Thought that this was an interesting article:

http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800

Basic jist is that a journalist was tasked with trying to convince people that eating chocolate could help people lose weight by using some pretty flawed science/experiments. Unsurprisingly he pulled it off, and explains how in the article.
 
New weight loss advice: keep it simple and balanced:

-Load up on low-glycemic foods
-Eat more of these protein-rich foods
-Don't worry so much about full-fat dairy
-Balance your meals
-Quit obsessing over calories


For the details to the above, go to:
http://www.lef.org/news/lefdailynews?NewsID=23894&Section=Nutrition
 
The way medicine should be...the integrative approach:

A new study has shed light on how cancer patients' attitudes and beliefs drive the use of complementary and alternative medicine. Published early online in CANCER, a peer-reviewed journal of the American Cancer Society, the findings may help hospitals develop more effective and accessible integrative oncology services for patients.

...patients who were younger, those who were female, and those who had a college education tended to expect greater benefits from complementary and alternative medicine....Attitudes and beliefs about complementary and alternative medicine were much more likely to affect patients' use than clinical and demographic characteristics.

"We found that specific attitudes and beliefs -- such as expectation of therapeutic benefits, patient-perceived barriers regarding cost and access, and opinions of patients' physician and family members -- may predict patients' use of complementary and alternative medicine following cancer diagnoses," said Dr. Mao. "We also found that these beliefs and attitudes varied by key socio-demographic factors such as sex, race, and education, which highlights the need for a more individualized approach when clinically integrating complementary and alternative medicine into conventional cancer care.

...therapies such as acupuncture and yoga continue to demonstrate clinical benefits for reducing pain, fatigue, and psychological distress, the field of integrative oncology is emerging to bring complementary and alternative medicine together with conventional care to improve patient outcomes.

"Our findings emphasize the importance of patients' attitudes and beliefs about complementary and alternative medicine as we seek to develop integrative oncology programs in academic medical centers and community hospitals," said Dr. Bauml.


Read article here:
http://www.lef.org/news/lefdailynews?NewsID=23918&Section=Disease
 
TheMightyOdin said:
Bender said:
After being sick for three months, getting healthy, going to vacay and dealing with all the nonsense happening at work, I'm finally able to get back into the gym. I live a 1hr15m commute from work, which is torture. It really puts a hamper on things. Luckily I'm probably going to be moving to a new job that cuts my travel time in half :)

I'm trying to lose fat and gain strength at the same time. I know some people say this is not possible but I think I can do it since I'm starting from scratch essentially again.

I'm really digging Scooby's Workshop, the guy seems knowledgeable and the great thing about him is he doesn't want to sell you anything, and he constantly drives the point home that you don't need to spend a lot.

http://scoobysworkshop.com/intermediate-workout-plan/

I'm doing this routine right now and getting some cardio in afterwards when I can.

Any opinions on this, Odin?

Keep at it Bender. As long as you feel "pushed" to get through the workouts with good form you will get results.

I just wanted to follow up on this. I finally committed to a workout and meal plan for six months (minus a couple weeks off for vacation and illness).

I am going to the gym 5-6 days a week and eating 6-7 small meals a day trying to meat my macros and eat 1g per lb of bodyweight per day.

The results have been impressive so far. I went on a four month "cutting" program and lost 20lbs and dropped to about 15% Bodyfat. I am now in the midst of a clean, light bulk, now trying to put on some muscle.

It's become very exciting. And I can take my mind off of so much other nonsense and concentrate on making myself better.
 
I need to get in shape again. I keep on doing the right thing for a few weeks, and then I'm like "meh, I'll just have some soda and some candy"..."yeah, and maybe I'll have some potato chips too"..and then I screw up all the work I did in the previous weeks. I used to be very disciplined for a while, I went to the gym at 5 am every morning to be alone :D I really need to start going to the gym again, but I need to work on my motivation.  ::)
 
Stebro said:
I need to get in shape again. I keep on doing the right thing for a few weeks, and then I'm like "meh, I'll just have some soda and some candy"..."yeah, and maybe I'll have some potato chips too"..and then I screw up all the work I did in the previous weeks. I used to be very disciplined for a while, I went to the gym at 5 am every morning to be alone :D I really need to start going to the gym again, but I need to work on my motivation.  ::)
It's interesting, I found a video by Elliott Hulse saying you shouldn't rely on inspiration, and motivation is literally just discipline.

I've cheated a bit the last few days due to birthdays and whatnot but I plan on being back on track soon.

Also I completed my first Spartan Race on Saturday. Woo!
 
Eat your greens!

A recent study says that leafy vegetables such as lettuce, spinach and kale and nitrate-rich vegetables are associated with lowering the risk of primary open-angle glaucoma by 20 to 30 percent.

This new study found people who ate a nitrate-rich diet had lower levels of primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG), a rare condition which involves chronic or acute sudden painful build-up of pressure in the eye.



http://www.lifeextension.com/news/lefdailynews?NewsID=24783&Section=Nutrition
 
started hiking again now the weather is improving in AZ. Was astounded to see that I am burning over 1200 calories in two hours according to the hiking calculators on weight, time per mile, vertical feet climbed and time of hike. Then you burn another 200 C later in the day as you body is still processing. Three hikes and feel like a new man. And eating micro greens like they are going out of style.
Only problem is I like to wash it down with Tequila or two
 
Highlander said:
My Uncle was the top Pharmaceutical salesman in Canada back in the 50-60's for Roussel.  No education but a helluva personality, today you need medical degrees to sell  pharma drugs. Lets face it, it is as big a business of oil and the lobbies in the U.S. are scary.  If we find a cure for cancer will it be released or buried, I have my questions on these things.

Digging up an old comment but this is honestly frustrating when I read stuff like this.  No-one is suppressing a treatment for cancer.  You can't cure, to the point of eradication, DNA damage.  It's not like Polio or Small pox where it's an actual foreign pathogen. 

 
L K said:
Highlander said:
My Uncle was the top Pharmaceutical salesman in Canada back in the 50-60's for Roussel.  No education but a helluva personality, today you need medical degrees to sell  pharma drugs. Lets face it, it is as big a business of oil and the lobbies in the U.S. are scary.  If we find a cure for cancer will it be released or buried, I have my questions on these things.

Digging up an old comment but this is honestly frustrating when I read stuff like this.  No-one is suppressing a treatment for cancer.  You can't cure, to the point of eradication, DNA damage.  It's not like Polio or Small pox where it's an actual foreign pathogen. 

Anyone who doesn't believe that there has been no "cancer cure" suppression in medical history is na?ve.

Throughout time, there have been many stories and documentations of individuals -- medical people be it researchers, doctors, etc., people such as Canada's heroic nurse Rene? Caisse,  who was brutally suppressed by being harangued in various ways by the then Ontario government of the day, the cancer establishment, for having given people hope with a formula called Essiac.  There was more than documented evidence, proof actually, that it helped people with cancer.

The above is just a case in point.  There are countless others.  The Cancer Treatment Centers of America, with their comprehensive approach to cancer,  (which includes yes, naturpathic medicine), first started up in Zion, Illinois.  They were warned not to open such a clinic, but they plowed on and expanded their facilities.  While they don't prefess to 'cure' all cancers, they give people the hope with their unique approach to cancer therapy including using various applications with Chemotherapy modalities, and the latest technologies (Cyberknife, Cryotherapy, Tomotherapy, IORT, etc.).

It doesn't take 100 years of purported cancer research to focus on how best to deal with this dreaded malady.  Only because of the advent of technology, has research obviously spearheaded.  Still, throughout the histories, there has been suppression of a various kind.  Remember Pasteur vs Bechamps?  Pasteur's version of the theory of disease, by his own admission, was flawed.  Bechamps was not.  The pharmaceuticals took Pasteur's theory (of treating the symptoms and not the root cause) as it worked very well for them (drug-wise & profit-wise).
Bechamps was villified, discredited, and left dispirited by this establishment.

(in later years, Pasteur, then retired and not involved with the medical community anymore, asked how everything was going as surely people's health must be improving, curing whatever ailed them, etcetera.  Much to his consternation, he found out that the opposite was quite true.  Taking it upon himself to do his own quiet research of this whole medical picture, he soon realized the truth of the times,  and in his own words uttered the foolowing: "Andre (Bechamps) was right and I was wrong.  The germ is nothing, the milieu is everything.  My God, what Have I unleashed!").

I don't personally believe in one cancer cure.  That doesn't make any sense.  The one size fits all does not, not just for cancer, but towards other disease mechanisms.  As Roy Rife noted, (another story of suppression here by the AMA & co.), using the then Rife Microscope, looking right down to the "ocean floor" of the cancer specimen, the cancer virus is not dead even if on the surface it appears dormant.  He discovered a way to render these cancer cells dead, (controversial at the time), and he also discovered that pigs carried the cancer virus. 
(More than a few years ago, doctors noted that Jewish people  had the lowest rates of cancer of any cultural group, and it's more than coincidence doctors said, that they don't eat pork.  Italians ironically had one of the highest.  Deli pork products have been highly consumed on the Italian menu).  Don't know if this is still applicable today with emphasis on healthier eating and overall general well-being.  If the cultural pendulum is the same or has shifted....

Anyways, what's irksome is when one says there is no cancer suppression, as if there had never been.  Wake up!  It was there and perhaps today it may not be as prevalent anymore, since diabetes is now being called the next epidemic.
 
I'm really not going to read all this, but my thinking is this: There is no point in suppressing medicine when plenty of people would give everything they own to not die from it.

Do you think David Bowie would rather have his $130million fortune or give it all away to, you know, not die. If people with high net worth, of high status get and die of cancer then I think it's reasonable to conclude that there is no cover up. Beyond the, you know, overwhelming amount of evidence from NON-BIASED scientists, who are required to state their conflicts of interest in peer reviewed medical journals.

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk

 
If you guys want my opinion on what causes cancer, it is the industrial revolution.  We are causing cancer with all the chemicals that we pump out into our environment.  We were not meant to live this way.  Once we start taking better care of our environment we will see the cancer rates drop.  Not just that but we need to lobby our government about all the additives that go into our food supply.  Canada is one of only two countries on earth that allow the additives to the food we eat every day.  Then there are all the genetically modified foods.  The preservatives.  Do you guys know how long a can of soup can sit on a grocery store shelf before it goes bad?  Years and years.  The same goes for most things in a grocery store.

I don't think cancer can or will ever be cured.  It needs to be prevented.  As others have said, cancer is damage to your DNA it's damage at the cellular level.

All of that being said, I can't ever imagine all of society suddenly making the drastic changes necessary to completely eliminate cancer.  It's really sad but it just looks like it's never going to happen.  Certainly not in our lifetimes.
 
Know what would lower the cancer rates?

Stop being such a healthy society that we live into our 80's instead of our 50's. Since 1950 -- only 65 years ago -- life expectancy at birth for developed nations has risen from around 65 years to around 79 years. All this despite cancer, industrial pollution, big pharma trying to profit off our misery and even the chemtrailz!!
 
hockeyfan1 said:
...
I don't personally believe in one cancer cure.  That doesn't make any sense.  The one size fits all does not, not just for cancer, but towards other disease mechanisms.  As Roy Rife noted, (another story of suppression here by the AMA & co.), using the then Rife Microscope, looking right down to the "ocean floor" of the cancer specimen, the cancer virus is not dead even if on the surface it appears dormant.  He discovered a way to render these cancer cells dead, (controversial at the time), and he also discovered that pigs carried the cancer virus. 
(More than a few years ago, doctors noted that Jewish people  had the lowest rates of cancer of any cultural group, and it's more than coincidence doctors said, that they don't eat pork.  Italians ironically had one of the highest.  Deli pork products have been highly consumed on the Italian menu).  Don't know if this is still applicable today with emphasis on healthier eating and overall general well-being.  If the cultural pendulum is the same or has shifted....

Did you honestly just quote someone who claims cancer is a virus?

But I thought it was caused by our bodies being too acidic?

No, no... that's wrong. It's actually a fungus related to candida yeast.

Oh, and of course chemotherapy kills more people than it cures.
 
National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society skewered in new book by leading cancer expert

Long article but a worthy read.  He speaks of prevention as being the key and speaks of conflicts of interests in the medical industry.

Click here:
http://www.naturalnews.com/032700_National_Cancer_Institute_Dr_Samuel_Epstein.html
 
My apologies, but I won't click on a link to naturalnews.com

Mike Adams is one of the most dangerous quacks out there. He is a fear-mongering profiteer that spreads so much misinformation.
 
Mike Adams, a.k.a. the Health Ranger, a health scamster profiled

Anyone who?s read this blog knows my opinion of Mike Adams, the proprietor of the quack website known as NaturalNews.com. It is not favorable, to put it mildly. All you have to do to realize that is to type his name into the search box of this blog and see what comes up: Anger at his attacks on celebrities who have died of cancer; mockery of his pretending to be a scientist and attacking Jimmy Kimmel for ?hate speech? about vaccines; alarm at his threats delivered with somewhat plausible deniability against scientists; further alarm at his ?natural biopreparedness? and homeopathy for Ebola; and, of course amusement at his New World Order conspiracy mongering. In terms of blog fodder, Adams is the gift that keeps on giving. Unfortunately, in terms of his influence against science and medicine and for pseudoscience and quackery, his influence is not insubstantial, so much so that when the opportunity presents itself I feel obligated to discuss him.

The opportunity has presented itself in the form of an excellent summation of the empire of pseudoscience and quackery that is Mike Adams by Sacha Feinman entitled Meet The Internet Entrepreneur Profiting Off The Anti-Vaxxer Movement. Of course, I have one quibble about this title. Adams profits off of way more than the antivaccine movement. Quackery, fear mongering about food, Scientology-like hatred of psychiatry to the point where after the Sandy Hook school massacre, he immediately blamed psychiatric medications for the rampage of Adam Lanza, the perpetrator of the massacre. But that?s just a quibble. The article itself tells the tale quite well. It also confirms something I?ve been writing for quite a while now, namely how Adams got his quacky start selling Y2K scams:

Towards the turn of the millennium, the Y2K bug was much on the mind of the media, representing perhaps the first great conspiracy of the digital age. True believers held that the seemingly simple switchover from 12/31/99 to 1/1/00 would cause computers and electronic systems the world over to crash, triggering international crises of every conceivable sort. Adams saw the opportunity in the situation, and began to sell supposed ?information products? that would insulate his paying audience from the oncoming chaos, which, of course, never came.

In a since-deleted excerpt on Adams? site published by ZDNet, Adams boasted that in 1999, ?in an effort to fine-tune his web marketing techniques, Michael [Adams] launched a six-month experiment to determine what kind of revenues are possible when combining his proprietary techniques and technologies with a high-awareness topic. The result? With the help of only one employee, he created a subscriber base of over 50,000 people and sold over $400,000 worth of information products while offering an open-ended, 100% moneyback [sic] guarantee.?

This subscriber base was largely won over by Adams? then infamous ?39 Unanswered Questions about Y2K.? In a foreshadowing of the sorts of the ?listicles? that would drive traffic to both Natural News and the site?s advertisers (not to mention BuzzFeed), Adams demonstrated a remarkable ability to frame a controversial issue in a manner perfectly suited for digital consumption. The widely shared email consisted of a series of fear-mongering questions such as, ?Why is there not a single Fortune 1000 firm that has said, in its 10-Q SEC statement, that it is fully, unequivocally Y2K-compliant?? Critics panned the listicle as, ?a national spamming campaign against the press and politicians to stir up enough anxiety to clear the shelves of Y2K supplies? and, ?the best publicity stunt I?ve seen.?
 
Bullfrog said:
My apologies, but I won't click on a link to naturalnews.com

Mike Adams is one of the most dangerous quacks out there. He is a fear-mongering profiteer that spreads so much misinformation.

I don't know much about Mike Adams a.k.a. the Health Ranger.  All I know is that that is where I found the link to the Dr. Epstein article.
 
Back
Top