View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
wynsurfer
Joined: 24 Aug 2007 Posts: 940
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20946
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
slinky wrote: | I tend to agree with much of what you have posted. Some is quite questionable however. Peer review? By whom? Most of it is opinion. I take much with a grain of salt. |
"Peer-reviewed" means clinical research has been reviewed by world-class experts and published in professional journals, like this list. It is THE basis for the world's evidence-based medical diagnostic and treatment system, for example, and SHOULD be the basis for policy and decisions based on economics, global warming, etc. Mere squids like us have no basis for questioning peer reviewed conclusions; that's left up to professional peers to refute by performing better research, finding flaws in the research in question, etc. The best we laymen can do is demonstrate that we are individual statistical outliers ... and that still doesn't disprove the statistical findings. Only the other methods mentioned above can do that.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20946
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 8:54 am Post subject: Re: Are you serious about your health, fitness, and longevity? |
|
|
feuser wrote: | what is pickle juice, other than electrolytes and water? |
But pickle juice works in a minute or so, long before it can leave the stomach, let alone the muscles.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
boardsurfr
Joined: 23 Aug 2001 Posts: 1266
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
isobars wrote: | "Peer-reviewed" means clinical research has been reviewed by world-class experts |
No, it does not. Peer reviewed means that a paper submitted for publication has been reviewed by at least one, but typically two, other scientists in the field. These are not "world-class experts", unless you call almost everyone working in the field a "world-class expert".
There is a lot of "politics" in publishing a scientific paper. It starts by choosing were to publish it - there are usually many different journals to choose from. The best journals may indeed have "world-class experts" as reviewers, but these publish just a small fraction of all research. Some journals let the authors suggest reviewers. Others accept almost everything that is submitted. Sometimes, great research is almost impossible to publish because it goes against the prevailing theories.
For many of the things isobars cites from the books, it is easy to find peer-reviewed scientific publications that prove exactly the opposite. Just that a study is newer than others does not necessary mean it is better or more likely to be correct.
It is quite worth the time to look at the original scientific research. I attached a graph from one of the recent papers that "proved" that stretching is bad. The individual points are results from different studies. There are plenty of studies that show stretching is "good" (positive numbers), and plenty of studies that stretching is "bad" (negative numbers). The differences between the individual studies are so big that combining them and coming to a "statistically relevant" conclusion seems like quite a stretch. All this is lost when reading about this in health magazines or books.
Description: |
|
Filesize: |
34.09 KB |
Viewed: |
15018 Time(s) |
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
ramps
Joined: 07 May 2000 Posts: 94
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would call you on the ability to change your DNA - was that facetious? You can have mutations in successive generations but yer DNA is what it is.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
boardsurfr
Joined: 23 Aug 2001 Posts: 1266
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 1:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
DNA is not as static as we thought not too long ago. The DNA sequence itself does not change, but the methylation patterns do - and methylation regulates which genes are "on" and "off", and at what level. Exercise has a very profound effect on methylation levels and gene expression. No big surprise if you just look at a water (or gym) rat and a couch potato! There's a nice article about this in the NY Times, with links to the original research.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20946
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS wrote: | Talk about obsessional behaviour. Just think what Robert Marchand, the 100 year old record breaking French Cyclist could have achieved, had he only put in such depth of research.
He rode 24.251 kilometres in an hour ... his doctor had advised him to keep his pulse rate around 110 or so. So he hadn't REALLY been trying. |
Simple mathematical fact: Either Marchand is a genetically gifted outlier, or decades of research and researchers are wrong in showing that prolonged LSD (long slow distance, aka aerobics) training usually does more harm than good and its followers are likely to pay a big price for it. His doctor's advice was more in line with the experts who add that only those whose goal is LSD competition AND who don't mind its downsides should do LSD training. Marchand won that gamble; Jim Fixx did not.
And, yes, I'm obsessive about my exercise physiology (and -- when applicable -- medical, nutritional, career, personal finance, sports, legal, and much more) research and effort. The rewards have been absolutely immense, up to and including life and death choices.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20946
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thousands of physicians ... and I ... agree with that whole article. One study, of the pro football team members whose high cholesterol begged for statins, took statins or a placebo as part of a trial. The conclusion: intense muscle exercise and statins are incompatible. Most of the guys on statins ve pacebo were rendered unable to play due to muscle pain, some almost losing their careers when it persisted LONG after stopping the statins. Mine lasted a year after quitting; some people never recover. Long story short, I am firmly convinced that the last two cardiologists I consulted were dead, flat, inexcusably wrong in putting me back on statins last year.
Yet the statin drug industry is lobbying extremely hard to have the world's governments not only prescribe statins for everyone but in many cases to put them in our drinking water.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20946
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mulekick84 wrote: | Feuser, this one is also a doosey: [b] Beyond a very modest minimum, core strength does not aid athletic performance. |
Take it up with Indiana State University PE professor Dr. Thomas Nesser and U. of Waterloo/Ontario spinal biomechanics professor Dr. Stuart McGill, who did the research. If your credentials and research results disprove theirs, you might get published, too.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
isobars
Joined: 12 Dec 1999 Posts: 20946
|
Posted: Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yup ... and notice the article's author: the author of the book I'm citing. She's the NYT's health and fitness columnist.
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You can attach files in this forum You can download files in this forum
|
|
|