<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Lift Heavy &#124; Maximum Mass With Hardcore Training</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 04:49:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#15 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-fridays-vol15-2012/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=geeky-fridays-vol15-2012</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-fridays-vol15-2012/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 04:49:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[back pain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BCAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bone density]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diabetes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[insulin resistance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lumbago]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obesity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strength training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Vitamin D]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=1028</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey geek! No long introduction this week, I&#8217;m just going to let you watch my 16 year old brother&#8217;s PR attempt from this week&#8217;s training. Some stats: Age: 16 Lifting experience: 1,5 years. Style: Sumo style deadlift, no belt, double overhand grip. And in case you&#8217;re wondering, the Swedish word in the end means &#8220;Light&#8221;. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/tönt.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1031" title="tönt" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/tönt-300x198.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="198" /></a></p>
<p>Hey geek!</p>
<p>No long introduction this week, I&#8217;m just going to let you watch my 16 year old brother&#8217;s PR attempt from this week&#8217;s training.</p>
<p><strong>Some stats</strong>:</p>
<p>Age: 16</p>
<p>Lifting experience: 1,5 years.</p>
<p>Style: Sumo style deadlift, no belt, double overhand grip.</p>
<p><iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/GbNVcsd0rA0" frameborder="0" width="480" height="360"></iframe></p>
<p>And in case you&#8217;re wondering, the Swedish word in the end means &#8220;Light&#8221;.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s the latest fitness, nutrition and supplementation research!</p>
<h2></h2>
<p><em>Make sure you keep supporting my work by sharing this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on<a href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a>,<a href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a> and<a href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly, feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p>–&gt; Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22569039&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Exercise-induced muscle damage is reduced in resistance-trained males by branched chain amino acids: a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled study. </a></h2>
<p>J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2012 May 8;9(1):20</p>
<p>Authors: Howatson G, Hoad M, Goodall S, Tallent J,BellPG, French DN</p>
<p>Abstract: ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: It is well documented that exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) decreases muscle function and causes soreness and discomfort. Branched-chain amino acid (BCAA) supplementation has been shown to increase protein synthesis and decrease muscle protein breakdown, however, the effects of BCAAs on recovery from damaging resistance training are unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to examine the effects of a BCAA supplementation on markers of muscle damage elicited via a sport specific bout of damaging exercise in trained volunteers. METHODS: Twelve males (mean +/- SD age, 23 +/- 2 y; stature, 178.3 +/-3.6 cmand body mass, 79.6 +/-8.4 kg) were randomly assigned to a supplement (n = 6) or placebo (n = 6) group. The damaging exercise consisted of 100 consecutive drop-jumps. Creatine kinase (CK), maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), muscle soreness (DOMS), vertical jump (VJ), thigh circumference (TC) and calf circumference (CC) were measured as markers of muscle damage. All variables were measured immediately before the damaging exercise and at 24, 48, 72 and 96 h post-exercise. RESULTS: A significant time effect was seen for all variables. There were significant group effects showing a reduction in CK efflux and muscle soreness in the BCAA group compared to the placebo (P &lt; 0.05). Furthermore, the recovery of MVC was greater in the BCAA group (P &lt; 0.05). The VJ, TC and CC were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: The present study has shown that BCAA administered before and following damaging resistance exercise reduces indices of muscle damage and accelerates recovery in resistancetrained males. It seems likely that BCAA provided greater bioavailablity of substrate to improve protein synthesis and thereby the extent of secondary muscle damage associated with strenuous resistance exercise.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2></h2>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22570955&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The relation of vitamin D deficiency with puberty and insulin resistance in obese children and adolescents. </a></h2>
<p>J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2012;25(1-2):83-7</p>
<p>Authors: Buyukinan M, Ozen S, Kokkun S, Saz EU</p>
<p>Abstract: The prevalence of obesity among children and adolescents has been rapidly increasing in recent years. Obese individuals are at risk for vitamin D deficiency. The aim of this study was to investigate the relation of vitamin D deficiency with puberty and insulin resistance in obese children and adolescents. A total of 106 children and adolescents (48 prepubertal and 58 pubertal) between 8 and 16 years of age were included in the study. Fasting blood glucose, insulin, lipid profile, calcium, phosphorus, alkaline phosphatase, parathyroid hormone, 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] levels, as well as blood glucose and insulin concentrations at 120 min of oral glucose tolerance test were measured. Insulin resistance was calculated using the homeostasis model assessment. Daily vitamin D intake was questioned. Serum 25(OH)D level was normal in only 3.8%, insufficient in 34.0%, and deficient in 62.2% of the subjects. There was a statistically significant rate of 25(OH)D deficiency in the pubertal group compared with that in the prepubertal group. Those subjects with 25(OH)D deficiency were found to have greater insulin resistance. Vitamin D deficiency is common among obese children and adolescents. Low vitamin D levels in obese individuals may accelerate the development of metabolic syndrome, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and cardiovascular disease by further increasing insulin resistance.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21508911&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Adaptive physical activity and back pain: a non-randomised community-based intervention trial. </a></h2>
<p>Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2011 Dec;47(4):543-9</p>
<p>Authors: Sofi F, Molino Lova R, Nucida V, Taviani A, Benvenuti F, Stuart M, Weinrich M, Cecchi F, Abbate R, Gensini GF, Macchi C</p>
<p>Abstract: BACKGROUND: Back pain is a significant problem due to the high healthcare utilization, rising costs of care and low effectiveness of many current treatments.<br />
AIM: Aim of this study was to determine the effects of a community-based Adapted Physical Activity (APA) program focused on chronic, non-specific back pain.<br />
DESIGN: Open-label intervention study.<br />
SETTING: Community.<br />
POPULATION: All patients admitted to Empoli Rehabilitation Department for non-specific back pain for at least three months, were considered for APA. Exclusion criteria were: &#8220;red flags&#8221;, difficulty/disability in basic daily living activities, severe/acute medical conditions, acute pain, psychiatric disease or cognitive impairment, severe visuoauditory deficit. Overall, 650 persons were enrolled.<br />
METHODS: The APA program, including strength and flexibility training and exercises for improving posture was delivered for 12 months, with 1-hour group classes three times per week.<br />
RESULTS: Overall 261 (40.2%) subjects completed the 12-month APA program and were compared to the 310 (47.7%) who were screened but failed to initiate or complete the study. There were no significant differences in baseline demographic and clinical characteristics between groups. Patients who followed the APA program reported significantly improved health status and significant back pain improvement, compared with those who did not adhere to the program. In the logistic regression analysis adjusted for age and gender, a distance from home to gymnasium greater than the median for the study population (2.6 km) was the only baseline characteristic significantly associated with an increased risk of non-adherence (OR 1.44, 95%CI 1.01-2.13; P=0.04).<br />
CONCLUSION: This study suggests that a community-based APA program can improve back pain and health status in persons with chronic, non-specific low back pain. CLINICA REHABILITATION IMPACT: These findings highlight the potential for new approaches to manage chronic disease and disability by facilitating a healthy lifestyle and promoting physical activity through implementation of community-based exercise programs.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=20500555&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Effect of whole-body vibration on neuromuscular performance and body composition for females 65 years and older: a randomized-controlled trial. </a></h2>
<p>Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2012 Feb;22(1):119-27</p>
<p>Authors: von Stengel S, Kemmler W, Engelke K,KalenderWA</p>
<p>Abstract: We examined whether the effect of multipurpose exercise can be enhanced by whole-body vibration (WBV). One hundred and fifty-one post-menopausal women (68.5 ± 3.1 years) were randomly assigned to three groups: (1) a training group (TG); (2) training including vibration (VTG); and (3) a wellness control group (CG). TG and VTG performed the same training program twice weekly (60 min), consisting of aerobic and strength exercises, with the only difference that leg strength exercises (15 min) were performed with (VTG) or without (TG) vibration. CG performed a low-intensity &#8220;wellness&#8221; program. At baseline and after 18 months, body composition was determined using dual-X-ray-absorptiometry. Maximum isometric strength was determined for the legs and the trunk region. Leg power was measured by countermovement jumps using a force-measuring plate. In the TG lean body mass, total body fat, and abdominal fat were favorably affected, but no additive effects were generated by the vibration stimulus. However, concerning muscle strength and power, there was a tendency in favor of the VTG. Only vibration training resulted in a significant increase of leg and trunk flexion strength compared with CG. In summary, WBV embedded in a multipurpose exercise program showed minor additive effects on body composition and neuromuscular performance.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22562545&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The effect of 12 weeks of resistance training on hormones of bone formation in young sedentary women. </a></h2>
<p>Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012 May 5;</p>
<p>Authors: Moghadasi M, Siavashpour S</p>
<p>Abstract: Physical activity has been proposed as one strategy to enhance bone mineral acquisition; however, the basic mechanisms of this effect are not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of 12 weeks of resistance training on hormones of bone formation in young sedentary women. Twenty sedentary females (aged 25.3 ± 3.2 years; ±SD) volunteered to participate in this study. The subjects were randomly assigned to a training group (n = 10) or control group (n = 10). Subjects executed eight resistance exercises selected to stress the major muscle groups in the following order: chest press, leg extension, shoulder press, leg curls, latissimus pull down, leg press, arm curls, and triceps extension. Resistance training consisted of 50-60 min of circuit weight training per day, 3 days a week, for 12 weeks. This training was circularly performed in eight stations and included two to four sets with 8-12 maximal repetitions at 65-80 % of one-repetition maximum in each station. After 12 weeks, the training group had a significant increase (P &lt; 0.05) in the growth hormone, estrogen, parathyroid hormone and testosterone compared to the control group. The results showed that insulin-like growth factor I levels did not change significantly in response to resistance training. In conclusion, the results suggest that resistance training with specific intensity and duration utilized in this study increases the hormones of bone formation in young sedentary women</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22119456&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Strength training increases maximum working capacity in patients with COPD&#8211;randomized clinical trial comparing three training modalities. </a></h2>
<p>Respir Med. 2012 Apr;106(4):557-63</p>
<p>Authors: Vonbank K, Strasser B, Mondrzyk J, Marzluf BA, Richter B, Losch S, Nell H, Petkov V, Haber P</p>
<p>Abstract: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Skeletal muscle dysfunction contributes to exercise limitation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Strength training increases muscle strength and muscle mass, but there is an ongoing debate on the additional effect concerning the exercise capacity. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of three different exercise modalities in patients with COPD including endurance training (ET), progressive strength training (ST) and the combination of strength training and endurance training (CT).<br />
DESIGN: A prospective randomized trial.<br />
METHODS: Thirty-six patients with COPD were randomly allocated either to ET, ST, or CT. Muscle strength, cardiopulmonary exercise testing, lung function testing and quality of life were assessed before and after a 12-week training period.<br />
RESULTS: Exercise capacity (Wmax) increased significantly in all three training groups with increase of peak oxygen uptake (VO2peak) in all three groups, reaching statistical significance in the ET group and the CT group. Muscle strength (leg press, bench press, bench pull) improved in all three training groups, with a higher improvement in the ST (+39.3%, +20.9%, +20.3%) and the CT group (+43.3%, +18.1%, +21.6%) compared to the ET group (+20.4%, +6.4%, +12.1%).<br />
CONCLUSIONS: Progressive strength training alone increases not only muscle strength and quality of life, but also exercise capacity in patients with COPD, which may have implications in prescription of training modality.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22575499&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Potential moderators and mediators of intervention effects in an obesity prevention program for adolescent boys from disadvantaged schools. </a></h2>
<p>J Sci Med Sport. 2012 May 8;</p>
<p>Authors:Lubans DR, Morgan PJ, Callister R</p>
<p>Abstract: OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to explore potential moderators and mediators of intervention effects in the Physical Activity Leaders (PALs) obesity prevention program for adolescent boys from disadvantaged secondary schools. DESIGN: Group randomized controlled trial. METHODS: One hundred adolescent boys (mean age=14.3 (0.6) years) from four schools were randomized to the PALs intervention or a control group for the 6-month study period. The primary outcome was change in BMI and secondary outcomes were physical activity assessed using pedometers and constructs from Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) assessed using a questionnaire. RESULTS: Moderation analyses revealed a significant weight status interaction for BMI (p=0.04), indicating stronger intervention effects for youth classified as overweight/obese at baseline. The intervention had a significant effect on resistance training self-efficacy (pRESULTS: A significant improvement in FMD was observed in the combined training group (P = 0.002), in contrast to the interval training alone group (P = NS); the improvement was significantly greater in the combined training than in the interval training alone group (P &lt; .05). Peak oxygen uptake increased significantly and similarly in both groups, in the interval training group (P = .03), and in the combined training group (P = .006). No significant correlation was found between FMD improvement and cardiopulmonary exercise parameters.<br />
CONCLUSIONS: A combined high-intensity, interval cycle exercise with strength training induces a greater beneficial effect on vascular reactivity rather than interval exercise training alone in CHF patients.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22581292&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Does frequency of resistance training affect tibial cortical bone density in older women? A randomized controlled trial. </a></h2>
<p>Osteoporos Int. 2012 May 12;</p>
<p>Authors: Ashe MC, Gorman E, Khan KM, Brasher PM, Cooper DM, McKay HA, Liu-Ambrose T</p>
<p>Abstract: This randomized controlled trial evaluated the effect of resistance training frequency (0, 1, and 2 times/week) on cortical volumetric bone mineral density (vBMD) at the tibia in older women. There was no mean difference in change in tibial cortical vBMD in older women who engaged in resistance training (RT) one or two times/week compared with the control group over 12 months after adjusting for baseline values. INTRODUCTION: National guidelines recommend RT two to three times/week to optimize bone health. Our objective was to determine the effect of a 12-month intervention of three different RT frequencies on tibial volumetric cortical density (CovBMD) in healthy older women. METHODS: We randomized participants to the following groups: (1) 2×/week balance and tone group (i.e., no resistance beyond body weight, BT), (2) 1×/week RT (RT1), and (3) 2×/week RT (RT2). Treatment allocation was concealed, and measurement team and the bone data analyst were blinded to group allocation. We used peripheral quantitative computed tomography to acquire one 2.3-mm scan at the 50 % tibia, and the primary outcome was CovBMD. Data were collected at baseline, 6 and 12 months, and we used linear mixed modeling to assess the effect at 12 months. RESULTS: We assessed 147 participants; 100 women provided data at all three points. Baseline unadjusted mean (SD) tibial CovBMD (in milligrams per cubic centimeter) at the 50 % site was 1,077.4 (43.0) (BT), 1,087.8 (42.0) (RT1), and 1,058.7 (60.4) (RT2). At 12 months, there were no statistically significant differences (-0.45 to -0.17 %) between BT and RT groups for mean difference in change in tibial CovBMD for exercise interventions (BT, RT1, RT2) after adjusting for baseline tibial CovBMD. CONCLUSION: We note no mean difference in change in tibial CovBMD in older women who engaged in RT one or two times/week compared with the control group over 12 months. It is unknown if RT of 3× or 4×/week would be enough to promote a statistically significant difference in change of bone density.</p>
<h3><span style="color: #ff0000;"><strong> →</strong></span> Reminder: Enter your e-mail below if you are interested in becoming the latest member of the Lift Heavy family.</h3>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-fridays-vol15-2012/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#14 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201214/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=geeky-friday-201214</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201214/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 May 2012 00:30:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cardio]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DOMS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fat loss]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fitness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Geeky Friday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hypertrophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strength]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[strongman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VLCD]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wii]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=1011</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My Geek! Welcome back to another edition of Geeky Friday! As you can all probably tell, my week has been extremely hectic as I’ve been staying extremely productive. I’ve produced two articles this week that I am very proud of, and thank you all for the amazing feedback. The response has been unbelievable and has [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Sexy-geek.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1016" title="Sexy geek" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Sexy-geek-300x218.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="218" /></a></p>
<p><strong>My Geek!</strong></p>
<p>Welcome back to another edition of Geeky Friday! As you can all probably tell, my week has been extremely hectic as I’ve been staying extremely productive. I’ve produced two articles this week that I am very proud of, and thank you all for the amazing feedback. The response has been unbelievable and has helped me reach out to so many new people. Thank you all for taking part in this by sharing the posts and contributing to the discussions by leaving your comments and reflections. The biggest thank you goes to the wonderful Lift Heavy family who has helped me make this a reality.</p>
<p>In case you are new visitor, make sure you read the posts by clicking the links below.</p>
<p>&#8211;&gt;  <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/ilcd-diet/">The ILCD – How A Doctor Dropped 5lbs In 1 Week</a></p>
<p>&#8211;&gt;  <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/a-doctors-response-to-a-response-from-a-doctor/">A Doctor’s Response, To A Response From A Doctor</a></p>
<p>To show my appreciation I have already started writing on a completely FREE training program that I will share with the VIP members of the Lift Heavy family ONLY. If you want to take part of this and much more VIP content, join the family now, we’d love to welcome you!</p>
<p>Here’s the latest research in the world of training, nutrition and supplementation. Dive in bud, talk soon!</p>
<p>BK</p>
<p><em>Make sure you keep supporting my work by sharing this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on<a href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a>,<a href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a> and<a href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly, feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p>–&gt; Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22569236&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Effects of Adding Exercise to a 16-Week Very Low-Calorie Diet in Obese, Insulin-Dependent Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients. </a></h2>
<p>J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012 May 8;</p>
<p>Authors: Snel M, Gastaldelli A, Ouwens DM, Hesselink MK, Schaart G, Buzzigoli E, Frölich M, Romijn JA, Pijl H, Meinders AE, Jazet IM</p>
<p>Abstract: Context:: Reduction of 50% excess body weight, using a very low-calorie diet (VLCD; 450 kcal/d) improves insulin sensitivity in obese type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.Objective:The objective of the study was to evaluate whether adding exercise to the VLCD has additional benefits.Design:This was a randomized intervention study.Setting:The study was conducted at a clinical research center in an academic medical center.Subjects:Twenty-seven obese [body mass index 37.2 ± 0.9 kg/m(2) (mean ± sem)] insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.Intervention:Patients followed a 16-wk VLCD. Thirteen of them simultaneously participated in an exercise program (E) consisting of 1-h, in-hospital training and four 30-min training sessions on a cycloergometer weekly.Outcome Measures:Insulin resistance was measured by a hyperinsulinemic euglycemic clamp. Insulin signaling, mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) content, and intramyocellular lipid content was measured in skeletal muscle biopsies.Results:Baseline characteristics were identical in both groups. Substantial weight loss occurred (-23.7 ±1.7 kgVLCD-only vs. -27.2 ±1.9 kgVLCD+E, P = NS within groups). The exercise group lost more fat mass. Insulin-stimulated glucose disposal increased similarly in both study groups [15.0 ± 0.9 to 39.2 ± 4.7 μmol/min(-1) · kg lean body mass (LBM(-1)) VLCD-only vs. 17.0 ± 1.0 to 37.5 ± 3.5 μmol/min(-1) · kg LBM(-1) in VLCD+E], as did phosphorylation of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase-protein kinase B/AKT insulin signaling pathway. In contrast, skeletal muscle mtDNA content increased only in the VLCD+E group (1211 ± 185 to 2288 ± 358, arbitrary units, P = 0.016 vs. 1397 ± 240 to 1196 ± 179, P = NS, VLCD-only group). Maximum aerobic capacity also only increased significantly in the VLCD+E group (+6.6 ± 1.7 ml/min(-1) · kg LBM(-1) vs. +0.7 ± 1.5 ml/min(-1) · kg LBM(-1) VLCD-only, P = 0.017).Conclusion:Addition of exercise to a 16-wk VLCD induces more fat loss. Exercise augments maximum aerobic capacity and skeletal muscle mtDNA content. These changes are, however, not reflected in a higher insulin-stimulated glucose disposal rate.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22569489&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Effects of aerobic or combined aerobic resistance exercise on body composition in overweight and obese adults: gender differences. a randomized intervention study. </a></h2>
<p>Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2012 May 8;</p>
<p>Authors: Sanal E, Ardic F, Kirac S</p>
<p>Abstract: BACKGROUND: In the literature, it is not yet clear whether sex may affect the outcomes of exercise training in obese adults. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate gender difference in the effects of combined aerobic resistance exercise (ARE) versus aerobic exercise (AE) alone on body composition in overweight and obese adults. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. SETTING: University-based outpatient clinic. POPULATION: Sixty-five healthy, untrained overweight and obese men and women METHODS:They were randomized into one of two intervention groups; AE group (N.=33) performed leg cycle exercises with increasing duration and frequency; ARE group (N.=32) performed additionally progressive weight-resistance exercises for the upper and lower parts of body. Both groups were asked not to change their diet. Body composition including percentage of fat (PF), fat mass (FM) and fat free mass (FFM) in regional and whole body was determined by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) at baseline and week 12. RESULTS: ARE leads to more gains on regional and whole body FFM than AE. ARE was more effective in increasing the FFM of arms, trunk and whole body and decreasing PF of trunk in men and superior on reducing FM of legs in women when comparing with AE. CONCLUSION: In order to reduce the trunk fat in men and leg fat in women, resistance exercise can be added into an aerobic training program. CLINICAL REHABILITATION IMPACT: Dissimilar results of exercises on sex obtained in our study serves as a guide for prescribing exercises in overweight and obese men and women.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22562746&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Linear and Daily Undulating Resistance Training Periodizations Have Differential Beneficial Effects in Young Sedentary Women. </a></h2>
<p>Int J Sports Med. 2012 May 4;</p>
<p>Authors: de Lima C, Boullosa DA,FrolliniAB, Donatto FF,Leite RD, Gonelli PR,MontebelloMI, Prestes J, Cesar MC</p>
<p>Abstract: The aim of this randomized controlled study was to verify the impact of a 12-weeks muscular endurance (ME) training of high repetitions (i. e., 15-30) with 2 different periodization models on body composition, maximal strength, muscular endurance and cardiorespiratory fitness. Twenty eight sedentary women aged 20-35 years were randomly assigned to: control (CON) (n=8), linear periodization (LP) (n=10) and daily undulating periodization (DUP) (n=10). LP and DUP models significantly improved body composition, maximal strength and ME. However, no significant changes were detected for cardiorespiratory fitness. LP showed a higher body fat loss ( &#8211; 12.73%) compared to DUP ( &#8211; 9.93%) (p=0.049), and systematically higher effect sizes (ES) when compared with DUP for maximal strength and cardiorespiratory fitness parameters (e. g. ES=0.53 for ventilatory threshold). In contrast, DUP exhibited a significantly (p=0.002) greater ME gain (129.43%) compared to LP (70.72%) in bench press, and greater ES in all exercises. It may be suggested that LP performed with a high number of repetitions may be considered an appropriate periodization model for untrained young women that would likely lead to the improvement of body composition and maximum strength performance, whereas DUP is more effective for the development of ME.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21039902&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Resistance exercise-induced hormonal response under the influence of delayed onset muscle soreness in men and boys. </a></h2>
<p>Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011 Dec;21(6):e184-94</p>
<p>Authors: Pullinen T, Mero A, Huttunen P, Pakarinen A, Komi PV</p>
<p>Abstract: It was hypothesized that exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD)-related alterations in hormonal responses could be observed if a second exercise bout is performed soon after an identical unaccustomed bout leading to delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS). Eight men (31 ± 7 years) and eight boys (14 ± 0 years) performed two exercise bouts (E1 and E2, with 48 h rest in between) consisting of three sets of bilateral knee extensions until exhaustion with 40% load. No differences between the groups or bouts were observed in the number of repetitions performed and maximal isometric force decline, or between groups in serum creatine kinase activity and DOMS. Decreased peak epinephrine (EPI) (-38%), growth hormone (GH) (-45%) and cortisol (COR) (-31%) concentrations were found in E2 in men (P</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22541990&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Resistance training to improve power and sports performance in adolescent athletes: A systematic review and meta-analysis. </a></h2>
<p>J Sci Med Sport. 2012 Apr 25;</p>
<p>Authors: Harries SK,Lubans DR, Callister R</p>
<p>Abstract:OBJECTIVE: Resistance training in untrained adolescents can positively effect health-related fitness as well as improve muscular power and sports performance. The impact of resistance training on adolescent athletes is less clear. The purpose of this review is to determine the effectiveness of resistance training programs on muscular power and sports performance in adolescent athletes. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of previously published studies investigating resistance training in adolescent athlete populations. METHODS: A systematic search of Medline, Embase, and SPORTDiscus databases was conducted on 21st March 2011 to identify studies evaluating resistance training programs on power and sports performance in adolescent athletes. RESULTS: Thirty-four studies were identified. All but two of the studies reported at least one statistically significant improvement in an alactic muscular power outcome. The most common indicators of alactic power were vertical jump (25 studies) and sprint running (13 studies) performance. Fourteen studies provided data to allow for pooling of results in a meta-analysis. A positive effect was detected for resistance training programs on vertical jump performance (mean difference 3.08 [95% CI 1.65, 4.51], Z=4.23 [P</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22533517&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Bigger weights may not beget bigger muscles: evidence from acute muscle protein synthetic responses after resistance exercise. </a></h2>
<p>Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2012 Apr 26;</p>
<p>Authors: Burd NA, Mitchell CJ, Churchward-Venne TA, Phillips SM</p>
<p>Abstract: It is often recommended that heavier training intensities (∼70%-80% of maximal strength) be lifted to maximize muscle growth. However, we have reported that intensities as low as 30% of maximum strength, when lifted to volitional fatigue, are equally effective at stimulating muscle protein synthesis rates during resistance exercise recovery. This paper discusses the idea that high-intensity contractions are not the exclusive driver of resistance exercise-induced changes in muscle protein synthesis rates.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22531621&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">EFECTS OF STRONGMAN TRAINING ON SALIVARY TESTOSTERONE LEVELS IN A SAMPLE OF TRAINED MALES. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Apr 19;</p>
<p>Authors: Ghigiarelli JJ, Sell KM, Raddock J, Taveras K</p>
<p>Abstract: Strongman exercises consist of multi-joint movements that incorporate large muscle mass groups and impose a substantial amount of neuromuscular stress. The purpose of this study was to examine salivary testosterone responses from two novel strongman training (ST) protocols in comparison to an established hypertrophic (H) protocol reported to acutely elevate testosterone levels. Sixteen males (24 ± 4.4 yr, 181.2 ±6.8 cm, and 95.3 ±20.3 kg) volunteered to participate in this study. Subjects completed three protocols designed to ensure equal total volume (sets and repetitions), rest period, and intensity between the groups. Exercise sets were performed to failure. Exercise selection and intensity (3 sets X 10 repetitions at 75% 1RM) were chosen as they reflected commonly prescribed resistance exercise protocols recognized to elicit a large acute hormonal response. In each of the protocols, subjects were required to perform 3 sets to muscle failure of 5 different exercises (tire flip, chain drag, farmers walk, keg carry, atlas stone lift) with a 2 minute rest interval between sets and 3 minute rest interval between exercises. Saliva samples were collected preexercise (PRE), immediate postexercise (PST), and 30 minutes postexercise (30PST). Delta scores indicated a significant difference between PRE and PST testosterone level within each group p ≤ 0.05, with no significant difference between the groups. Testosterone levels spiked 136% (225.23 ± 148.01 pg·ml) for the H group, 74% (132.04 ± 98.09 pg·ml) for the ST group, and 54% (122.10 ± 140.67 pg·ml) for the mixed strongman/hypertrophy (XST) group. A significant difference for testosterone level occurred over time (PST to 30PST) for the H group p ≤ 0.05. In conclusion, ST elicits an acute endocrine response similar to a recognized H protocol when equated for duration and exercise intensity</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22201687&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Kinematic changes using weightlifting shoes on barbell back squat. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):28-33</p>
<p>Authors: Sato K, Fortenbaugh D, Hydock DS</p>
<p>Abstract: The purpose of this study was to validate a higher degree of foot segment angle by wearing the weightlifting (WL) shoes and to determine the kinematic differences between WL shoes and running shoes during the barbell back squat. College-aged individuals volunteered to participate in this study (N = 25). After warm-up, subjects performed 60% of 1RM barbell back squat. Reflective markers were placed on lower extremity joints and end of the bar to create segments to analyze kinematics of the barbell back squat from a 2-dimensional view. Three separate repeated measure analyses of variance were used at p = 0.05. Results showed that there was a difference between the footwear conditions; foot segment angle of 3.5° (p &lt; 0.05) and trunk lean of22 mm(p &lt; 0.05) were captured when wearing WL shoes. However, thigh segment peak flexion angle was not statistically different (p = 0.37). Wearing WL shoes seems to be beneficial in reducing the overall trunk lean, because this position is believed to reduce the amount of shear stress in the lower back area. Back squat with WL shoes also increased foot segment angle and possibly contributes to greater muscle excitation in knee extensors. Weightlifting shoes did not help reach thigh segment closer to horizontal as compared with the running shoe condition. It is recommended that WL shoes be used by those who are prone to displaying a forward trunk lean and who aim to increase knee extensor activation.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22158262&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Improving lower limb weight distribution asymmetry during the squat using Nintendo Wii Balance Boards and real-time feedback. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):47-52</p>
<p>Authors: McGough R, Paterson K, Bradshaw EJ, BryantAL,ClarkRA</p>
<p>Abstract: Weight-bearing asymmetry (WBA) may be detrimental to performance and could increase the risk of injury; however, detecting and reducing it is difficult in a field setting. This study assessed whether a portable and simple-to-use system designed with multiple Nintendo Wii Balance Boards (NWBBs) and customized software can be used to evaluate and improve WBA. Fifteen elite Australian Rules Footballers and 32 age-matched, untrained participants were tested for measures of WBA while squatting. The NWBB and customized software provided real-time visual feedback of WBA during half of the trials. Outcome measures included the mean mass difference (MMD) between limbs, interlimb symmetry index (SI), and percentage of time spent favoring a single limb (TFSL). Significant reductions in MMD (p = 0.028) and SI (p = 0.007) with visual feedback were observed for the entire group data. Subgroup analysis revealed significant reductions in MMD (p = 0.047) and SI (p = 0.026) with visual feedback in the untrained sample; however, the reductions in the trained sample were nonsignificant. The trained group showed significantly less WBA for TFSL under both visual conditions (no feedback: p = 0.015, feedback: p = 0.017). Correlation analysis revealed that participants with high levels of WBA had the greatest response to feedback (p &lt; 0.001, ρ = 0.557). In conclusion, WBA exists in healthy untrained adults, and these asymmetries can be reduced using real-time visual feedback provided by an NWBB-based system. Healthy, well-trained professional athletes do not possess the same magnitude of WBA. Inexpensive, portable, and widely available gaming technology may be used to evaluate and improve WBA in clinical and sporting settings.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22562221&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Resistance training and the risk of colon and rectal cancers. </a></h2>
<p>Authors: Boyle T, Bull F, Fritschi L, Heyworth J</p>
<p>Abstract: PURPOSE: Although there is convincing evidence that physical activity reduces colon cancer risk, research in this area has focused on aerobic activity. We conducted a case-control study to investigate whether resistance training was associated with the risk of colon and rectal cancers. METHODS: Data were collected on various colorectal cancer risk factors, including recreational physical activity performed during three age periods, from 870 cases and 996 controls inWestern Australiain 2005-2007. Participants were classified as having never, possibly, or definitely performed resistance training in each age period and over the adult lifetime. The association between resistance training and colon and rectal cancer risk was analyzed using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Participants who definitely performed resistance training in their lifetime had a non-significant reduced risk of colon cancer compared with those who did no resistance training (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.70, 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 0.45-1.11). No association was found for rectal cancer risk (AOR = 1.16, 95 % CI = 0.71-1.87). Performing resistance training was associated with a lower risk of colon cancer in each age period, although none of the relationships were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: This study provides some initial evidence, albeit inconclusive, that resistance training may be inversely associated with colon cancer risk.</p>
<div>
<h3><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;"> →</span></strong> Reminder: Enter your e-mail below if you are interested in becoming the latest member of the Lift Heavy family.</h3>
</div>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201214/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Doctor’s Response, To A Response From A Doctor</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/a-doctors-response-to-a-response-from-a-doctor/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-doctors-response-to-a-response-from-a-doctor</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/a-doctors-response-to-a-response-from-a-doctor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 03:00:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[doctor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fitness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tony Gentilcore]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=944</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Joe Lightfoot, a last year medical student, wrote a guest article named Just Because A Doctor Said It – A Response on Tony Gentlicore’s blog, and its popularity has been spreading like this year’s strain of the influenza virus. You should definitely read that blog post; it’s a good piece with some thought-provoking points, and [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/speak-no-evil-doctor.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-949 aligncenter" title="Bojan Kostevski" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/speak-no-evil-doctor-300x243.jpg" alt="Bojan Kostevski" width="300" height="243" /></a></p>
<p>Joe Lightfoot, a last year medical student, wrote a guest article named <a href="http://www.tonygentilcore.com/blog/just-because-a-doctor-said-it-a-response/">Just Because A Doctor Said It – A Response</a> on Tony Gentlicore’s blog, and its popularity has been spreading like this year’s strain of the influenza virus. You should definitely read that blog post; it’s a good piece with some thought-provoking points, and you&#8217;ll probably need it to understand my arguments fully.</p>
<p>I’m constantly bombarded by stories of people&#8217;s &#8220;stupid doctors&#8221; who said X,Y and Z about fat loss diets on my <a href="https://twitter.com/#!/BojanKostevski" target="_blank">Twitter </a>and <a title="http://www.facebook.com/bkostevski" href="http://www.facebook.com/bkostevski" target="_blank">Facebook </a>news feed. This bashing is getting tiresome, and if you ask me, it&#8217;s based on completely the wrong premises of what I do as a medical doctor versus what I did when I worked as a personal trainer, or what I do currently with my online <a title="Consultations" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/consultations/" target="_blank">consultations</a>.</p>
<p>As a physician working with real patients on daily basis, I do have a few opinions which I&#8217;d like to share. Joe Lightfoot and I agree on many points, but there are a few aspects that I believe needs to be added to the discussion. So far, the discussion seems solely focused on two parties: the health practitioner and the trainer. We have completely forgotten to include the third, and biggest party: the general population.</p>
<h2>Point one: the misconception about what doctors do</h2>
<p><strong>Question:</strong> As a doctor, do you know I do on a daily basis?</p>
<p><strong>Answer:</strong> I see ill people (also called <em>patients</em>). I sit by their bed, I comfort them, listen to their stories, examine them, use the x-ray to get under their skin so I can give them a diagnosis, plan their treatment, prescribe the right medicine and do a follow up.</p>
<blockquote><p>Doctors need more education on everything to do with lifestyle advice, particularly exercise and nutrition. That is indisputable.</p></blockquote>
<p>That is an interesting point by Joe Lightfoot, and in a fantasy world where you could ride the rainbow, shower in moonbeams, and do wand-wielding magic, that could probably be feasible. Reality however, is a cruel mistress.  In most countries med school is six years long, and that is before any kind of specialization comes into play. In the real world, there is just not enough time to learn everything. Specially if it is not going to be a part of what you will be doing on day-to day basis because to become a good clinician, we need to get students out of med school as fast as possible and get them to start building real world experiences.</p>
<p>Sure, doctors need to understand human physiology and the effects of lifestyle on the pathological processes, to a minimal degree. This is a very important point, which is why I will repeat it: they need to understand it,<strong> to a minimal degree</strong>.</p>
<p>What often comes to light in these discussions is that the advice given by your idiot doc was not the &#8220;optimal&#8221; advice. Nor was it in accordance to the latest paper published in the British Journal of Nutrition (which you have probably only read the abstract of). That&#8217;s considered talking about <strong>expert opinions</strong>, not general guidelines. I repeat once again: doctors need to understand human physiology and the effect of lifestyle on the pathological processes to a minimal degree, as a way to understand ILLNES and the treatment thereof. Because <strong>THAT </strong>is what doctors do. There is just no time to learn all that other stuff, unless that’s something you are genuine interested in (and even then, people will still call you an idiot because you don’t follow the same nutritional cult as they do).</p>
<p>This brings us to the next point</p>
<h2><strong>Point two: The reason doctors give advice on fitness and nutrition even if they </strong>shouldn&#8217;t</h2>
<p>So if doctors really don’t have a clue about <em>optimal</em> nutrition or exercise physiology (the two weeks spent touching on that during med school just aren’t enough) – why the hell do they give you advice about it?</p>
<p>Just like Joe Lightfoot said:</p>
<blockquote><p>Whilst some are motivated by money and titles, the vast majority of people became doctors because they want to help their patients.</p></blockquote>
<p>They will give you advice because of the very same reasons <em>anyone</em> gives advice about nutrition or fitness. With a few exceptions, your doctor wants to help you, and will say what he or she truly believes will do so. So does your mom, your neighbour and your personal trainer. That does not mean they know what they are talking about, and YOU are the misinformed one who thinks that’s what they are supposed to know. If you&#8217;re not smart enough to know who to listen to, then you&#8217;re just as &#8220;dumb&#8221; as they are. Don&#8217;t blame others because they tried to help your ass out.</p>
<h2><strong>Point three: Your doctor is not the idiot. You are. </strong></h2>
<p>Nutrition and the education on lifestyle and preventive medicine during med school was minimal. And like I stated above: I don’t necessarily think that including more lectures and adding years to med school is the solution, since that is not what we work with on day to day basis once school’s out. When you ask anyone on the street what you should eat to lose weight, you&#8217;ll get the answer this person happens to have, which is usually influenced heavily by external factors. This could be yesterday&#8217;s magazine, some random documentary or from last week’s episode of The Biggest Loser. Understand this: Your doctor has the SAME source of information as the general public. It’s you who thinks that just because your doctor said it, there should be some validity to it. In a way, calling doctors stupid because of the nutrition advice they give, tells more about the knowledge of the audience than the doctor.</p>
<p>The focus needs to shift from the doctors being stupid and not knowing shit, to the general population who are the misinformed ones about what they can expect from their physician. Give your doctor a pair of strange sounding lungs and you <em>should</em> expect him/her to diagnose pneumonia and prescribe you with the right antibiotics. However, don&#8217;t expect him to know which the optimal diet is for fat loss, even if <em>he</em> does think he knows, and there is a stethoscope hanging around his neck.</p>
<h1><strong>The conclusion</strong></h1>
<p>In the perfect world, doctors would stop giving advice about areas outside of their expertise (so would the general population). In the meantime, the general masses need to get their facts right about what a physician’s job is and most importantly, what it&#8217;s NOT&#8230; before they start hating for the sake of hating.  On the same note, trainers need to shut up with advice about how much water people should drink to reduce risk of kidney stones, how sleep deprivation causes cardiovascular disease and why gluten is the most evil thing since dairy.</p>
<p>Finally, I want to get back to the original question:</p>
<h3 style="text-align: center;"><strong> Is it true because your doctor said so?</strong></h3>
<p style="text-align: left;">I’d say it depends on the initial question you asked your doctor. If your physician is trying to explain what bacteria caused your pneumonia and how you should go about treating it &#8211; the yes, you should expect your doctor to know, because THAT is what we do. When it comes to nutrition, preventive medicine, or exercise physiology? No, not any more that you trust your mother, neighbour or favourite columnist – they all get their information from the same sources anyway.</p>
<p>The takeaway is this: <strong>Stay critical</strong> and ask for people’s sources, never ever trust people blindly just because of their title &#8211; be it your doctor, mother or columnist.</p>
<h4 style="text-align: right;">Trust me – I’m a doctor</h4>
<div class="mceTemp" style="text-align: right;">
<dl id="attachment_954" class="wp-caption alignright" style="width: 310px;">
<dt class="wp-caption-dt"><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/DSC01740.jpeg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-954 " title="Bojan Kostevski" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/DSC01740-300x289.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="289" /></a></dt>
<dd class="wp-caption-dd"></dd>
</dl>
</div>
<h4 style="text-align: left;"><span style="color: #000000;">Like this article? Try the <strong>share</strong> buttons on your left! Do you agree with me? Do you disagree? Feel free to discuss in the comment section below. Also, join the Lift Heavy family for VIP content by entering your name and best email address in the opt in box. It&#8217;s completely free!</span></h4>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/a-doctors-response-to-a-response-from-a-doctor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The ILCD &#8211; How A Doctor Dropped 5lbs In 1 Week</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/ilcd-diet/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=ilcd-diet</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/ilcd-diet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 01:00:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Featured]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fasting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ilcd]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[psmf]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[VLCD]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=964</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[There was an experiment done recently, where the goal was to find out what would happen if a guy who is reasonably jacked, has about a decade’s worth of training experience under his belt, and is known for lifting heavy, did something as radical as eat 2000 calories below his maintenance energy intake for 6 [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a onclick="window.open('http://www.lift-heavy.com/files/ilcd_experiment.mp3','popup','width=500,height=275,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=200,top=200'); return false" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/files/ilcd_experiment.mp3"><img style="border: 0px;" src="http://flawlessfitnessbook.com/images/mp3_download.png" alt="bojankostevski_article_download" /></a></p>
<p>There was an experiment done recently, where the goal was to find out what would happen if a guy who is reasonably jacked, has about a decade’s worth of training experience under his belt, and is known for lifting heavy, did something as <em>radical</em> as eat 2000 calories below his maintenance energy intake for 6 days!</p>
<p>Would he pulverize all muscle mass? Lose his hard-earned gains? Go into “starvation mode”? Experience metabolic slowdown? Destroy his relationships due to loss of sanity?</p>
<p>Or would he become an even leaner, sexy beast?</p>
<p>The aim of this experiment was to search for a new, alternative and extremely effective method for perfecting physiques across the globe. And as you can probably guess, the jacked guy who was mental enough to suffer through such an experiment, was me!</p>
<h3><strong>Let’s Start With The VLCD</strong></h3>
<p>The Protein Sparing Modified Fast (PSMF) is a Very Low Calorie Diet (VLCD) designed over 40 years ago to induce rapid weight loss in the morbidly obese patient group under careful medical supervision. A strict definition of the PSMF does not exist, but common figures suggest a daily food intake which ranges from 400 to 1000 calories per day &#8211; most of which comes from lean protein sources. Its effectiveness has been proven in numerous scientific studies where the results have been favorable weight loss with minimal muscle loss. In one such study, 668 obese patients who, in combination with exercise and diet advice, were put on a 1000 calorie/day PSMF (1,5 gramsof protein/kg ideal body weight) for an average of 17 weeks and lost21 kg(47lbs), on average, of body weight with positive health effects such as lowered blood pressure and improved blood lipid status(1).</p>
<p>Now, you’re probably thinking: “<em>So putting fat people on semi-starvation diets leads to weight loss, what a surprise!” </em>But here’s what’s interesting: one study showed reduced hunger sensations in obese patients treated with a 500 calorie PSMF, compared to those put on a balanced 1200 calorie weight loss diet &#8211; suggesting a bigger anorexic (hunger inhibiting) effect with the more radical diet, over a four-week period (2).</p>
<p>Yet another interesting study compared the difference in weight loss and perceived hunger between PSMF in the form of solid foods or a protein-formula-liquid diet. Both diets provided about 400 kcal daily(3). There were no differences in weight loss. However, the liquid diet subjects reported <em>increased</em> hunger compared to the group eating solid food over a two week period.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-968" title="fig1" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/fig1.jpg" alt="" width="271" height="258" /></p>
<p>So, what does this tell us? That solid food is better than protein shakes? Yes, maybe, but one important factor in the study design needs to be addressed before such a conclusion is made. The macronutrient distribution between the diets were different, in that the liquid diet contained no more than 2 g of fat per day along with 30 g carbohydrates, as compared to the solid food group whose fat intake was noticeably higher since their source of protein was lean meat, fish and fowl, and contained almost no carbohydrates. We know that fats are more satiating than carbohydrates given isocaloric conditions, at least for the short term. Also, as you can see in the diagram, if the experiment were to continue for a longer period of time, the difference in perceived satiety might subside between the two diet setups.</p>
<h3><strong>Reported adverse effects from PSMF(1,2,4) include:</strong></h3>
<ul>
<li>Mild postural lightheadedness</li>
<li>Fatigue</li>
<li>Decreased bowel movements and constipation</li>
<li>Electrolyte disturbances</li>
<li>Cold intolerance</li>
<li>Dry skin</li>
<li>Hair loss (after many weeks)</li>
</ul>
<p>Adverse effects are rare, and most patients felt good on the PSMF and were probably motivated further by their ability to lose weight. Given the short time frame of my experiment, I hypothesized that any general risk, or any of the side effects mentioned above would be minimal.</p>
<p>So, from the science we can draw the following conclusions:  Very low calorie diets in the form of PSMF have been used with great success in the mildly to severe obese population for weight loss, reduction of cardiovascular risk factors, metabolic risk factors, and sensations of hunger. All of this with minimal, and often rare adverse effects. Awesome.</p>
<p>As expected, no studies have been made on the non-obese population such as bodybuilders, powerlifters, and frequent gym-goers. Nor have any studies been done that throw in proper resistance training. Such a study could even be considered ethically questionable since the non-obese population have such a high basal metabolic rate that putting them on VLCD can sacrifice their performance and/or gains. Fortunately, there is one crazy doc who doesn’t give a shit, happens to fit the description of non-obese, and was willing to try. And try he did.</p>
<h3><strong>Defining the ILCD</strong></h3>
<p>If a 500-1000 calorie/day diet for an obese person (who has a low basal metabolic rate) is considered a VERY low calorie diet, then a 650-750/day calorie diet for someone with a maintenance intake of 2750 calories/day is absolutely insane! Thereby inducing the highly scientific term: <strong>Insanely Low Calorie Diet (ILCD).</strong></p>
<p>Now,<em> “why the hell would someone want to do something like that?”</em> you might ask yourself. Did I really want to do this because I thought there was a huge scientific gap in the understanding of the effects of PSMF on the non-obese or general population? Of course not. My goal was, and always will be, to find different ways in which to produce lean, shredded bodies with confident personalities so I can enrich the lives of myself, and my clients.</p>
<p>I’m trying to manipulate human physiology in way which produces the lowest amount of body fat with maximal muscle mass… without the use of illegal substances. See? Even doctors have to search for the “holy grail” when it comes to looking sexy.</p>
<p>The main questions which motivated me to start this whole process were:</p>
<ol>
<li>What would happen if someone fairly advanced, with a decade of strength training behind them tried to substitute the classic 500 calorie/day deficit with a burst of an <em>extreme</em> deficit, along with a period of maintenance caloric intake?</li>
<li>Could I get the same results from very intense deficits for a week every so often, instead of long, boring dieting for months?</li>
<li>Does a one week 2000 calorie/day deficit equal to four weeks of 500 calorie/day deficit dieting, results wise?</li>
<li>Is this even something that could be pulled off without muscle loss, loss of sanity, broken hearts, and putting my job in jeopardy? (Doctors need to pay attention at work, as you know)</li>
</ol>
<p>A word of caution: This is not a program I recommend to the general trainee and the whole trial was done under medical supervision. <strong><em>I do not take any responsibility</em></strong> (except for the awesome rate of fat loss) for those who plan on replicating my experiment.</p>
<p>Here’s the written plan that I wrote before starting the experiment.</p>
<h3><strong>The ILCD experiment setup:</strong></h3>
<p><strong>Daily nutrient intake:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Alternating amino acids (EAA) and Casein drinks</li>
<li>10 fish oil capsules (o3)</li>
<li>Multivitamins</li>
<li>Electrolyte substitution</li>
</ul>
<p>…Along with an unrestricted intake of coffee, water and other non-caloric beverages, landing at a total of <span style="text-decoration: underline;">750 calories/day </span>(calories from fish oil included).</p>
<p><em>“Why liquid protein sources and not solid food”, </em>you might ask? After all, the study I mentioned earlier said that solid food might be better in terms of feeling fuller for longer. Personally, the reason was purely psychological. I didn&#8217;t want to cook my normal food, only to force myself into eating very minute amounts. It’s too much of a tease. I wanted to completely get away from eating or preparing food, doing the dishes and everything else associated with eating in general.</p>
<p><strong>Training:</strong></p>
<p>My plan was to do three fully-body heavy strength sessions as outlined below, with the most important exercises in the first workout when performance <em>should</em> still be high. I also did 3 sets x 5 repetitions on the main exercises and 2 x 6-8 on the accessory movement. On the last day (Sunday) I threw in one intense glycogen depleting session with high reps, followed by a big 4000 calorie carbohydrate reefed to refill glycogen stores and start the maintenance period.</p>
<table width="609" border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="151"><em>Monday</em></td>
<td valign="top" width="165"><em>Wednesday</em></td>
<td valign="top" width="141"><em>Friday</em></td>
<td valign="top" width="151"><em>Sunday</em></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td valign="top" width="151">Bench press</p>
<p>Squats</p>
<p>Chins (weighted)</p>
<p>Barbell curls</td>
<td valign="top" width="165">Chest supported row</p>
<p>Standing military press</p>
<p>Rack pulls</p>
<p>Lying triceps extensions</td>
<td valign="top" width="141">Lunges</p>
<p>Dips (weighted)</p>
<p>Dumbbell rows</p>
<p>Standing calf raises</td>
<td valign="top" width="151">
<p align="center">High repetition, glycogen depleting workout</p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p>After the ILCD week, I planned an intense carb cycling program with every other day training sessions. Rest days would be a pretty heavy deficit, resulting in a 1500 calorie intake and training days at 4000 calories, averaging out at 2750 calories daily. This is basically my maintenance intake overall.<strong> </strong></p>
<p><strong>And so the experiment began. Below is my diary, day in and day out. It’s uncensored for your reading pleasure. Enjoy</strong></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-969" title="pic1" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/pic1-160x300.jpg" alt="" width="160" height="300" /></p>
<h2><strong>Diary</strong></h2>
<h3>Day 1- Monday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight: 81,4 kilograms</strong></p>
<p>06.30 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA + 10 O3</p>
<p>09.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>11.45 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>13.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>15.00 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>16.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein  + Electrolytes</p>
<p>19.00 &#8211; pre workout 12,5 g EAA + Creatine</p>
<p><strong><em>Workout: </em></strong></p>
<p>Bench press 110kg x 4,2,4,2,4</p>
<p>Chins BW+37,5kg 5,4,3</p>
<p>Squats 117,5kg x 4,4,4</p>
<p>Barbell curls 50kg x 10,7</p>
<p><em>Workout 8/10</em></p>
<p><em>Notes: Struggled a bit with technique on bench press. Other than that, awesome workout with increases in all lifts and surprisingly high energy levels! Pretty much felt like any other workout. </em></p>
<p>21.00 post workout 12,5 g EAA + Creatine</p>
<p>22.00 30 g Casein + Electrolytes + Multivitamins</p>
<p><strong><em>Day summary:</em></strong><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Mental focus 5/10 (due to sleep deprivation, not hunger)</em></p>
<p><em>Hunger 3/10</em></p>
<p><em>Irritability 1/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Really easy first day. Low mental energy during the day but this wasn’t due to my low calorie intake but because of a night without much sleep. Excited about whether I will wake up hungry tonight, or if I will have to go to the bathroom frequently. I expect day 2 and 3 to be a lot harder! </em></p>
<h3>Day 2 &#8211; Tuesday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight:  79,0 kg (-2,4)</strong></p>
<p>06.30 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA + 10 O3 + Multivitamins + Creatine + Electrolytes</p>
<p>09.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>11.45 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>13.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>16.00 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>17.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein + Electrolytes</p>
<p>21.00 &#8211; 12,5g EAA</p>
<p>22.00 &#8211; 40g Casein</p>
<p><strong><em>Day summary:</em></strong></p>
<p><em>Mental focus 8/10</em></p>
<p><em>Hunger 3/10 (some hunger spikes in the evening, NO hunger pangs during the day)</em></p>
<p><em>Irritability 1/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Expected the real fatigue and hunger to kick in today. Positively surprised by the fact that I slept like a baby, and the whole day passed without any problems &#8211; no lethargy, no irritability and except for a few hunger spikes in the evening, NO hunger pangs. </em><em> </em></p>
<h3>Day 3 &#8211; Wednesday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight:  78,2 kg (-3,2)</strong></p>
<p>06.30 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA + 10 O3 + Multivitamins + Electrolytes</p>
<p>09.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>11.45 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>13.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>16.00 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>17.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein + Electrolytes</p>
<p>19.00 &#8211; pre workout 12,5g EAA + Creatine</p>
<p><strong><em>Workout</em></strong><strong>: </strong></p>
<p>Sumo rack pulls 152,5kg  x 5,5,5</p>
<p>Standing OH press 60kg  x 5,5,5</p>
<p>Chest supp row 55kg  x 5,5,5</p>
<p>Seated dumbbell triceps extensions 14kg x 6,6</p>
<p><em>Workout 7/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Notes: Mentally, training was hard today, and I felt like shit if I’m honest (pretty much as expected). Surprisingly enough though, performance was really good with a PR in sumo rack pulls. Awesome. </em></p>
<p>21.00 &#8211; post workout 12,5 g EAA + Creatine</p>
<p>22.00 &#8211; 30 g SLOOW Casein  + Electrolytes</p>
<p><strong><em>Day summary:</em></strong><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Mental focus 7/10</em></p>
<p><em>Hunger 5/10</em></p>
<p><em>Irritability 2/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>No hunger in the morning but definitely starting to feel more lethargic and tired. Mental focus is very good and concentration during the day is not a problem. Still, the hardest day so far. Surprisingly, performance in gym is still really high even if, mentally, I have a hard time getting motivated to hit up the gym. Also, starting to feel a metallic taste in my mouth which probably means that production of ketone bodies is really starting to kick in. Sleep is still no problem once I go horizontal. </em></p>
<h3>Day 4 &#8211; Thursday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight:  77,6 kg (-3,8)</strong></p>
<p>06.30 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA + 10 O3 + Multivitamins + Creatine + Electrolytes</p>
<p>09.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>11.45 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>13.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>16.00 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>17.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein  + Electrolytes</p>
<p>21.00 -12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>22.00 -40 g Casein</p>
<p><strong><em>Day summary:  </em></strong></p>
<p><em>Mental focus 8/10</em></p>
<p><em>Hunger 3/10</em></p>
<p><em>Irritability 2/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Today actually felt easier than yesterday. Had a really hectic day at work with tons to do, concentration was maximal, mental energy was high and hunger was not an issue. Just like yesterday, fatigue kicked in a bit more in the evening, and taste of metal is even more pronounced now. Definitely starting to think more about food and I really miss having a meal. Another problem is falling asleep. Once I fall asleep, I sleep like a baby but every day so far takes me longer to fall asleep. Also, I’m starting to feel worried about the weekend since I think it will be much harder when I don&#8217;t have the huge workload to occupy my mind. This might allow the thought of food to creep in.</em></p>
<h3>Day 5 &#8211; Friday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight: 77,6 kg (-3,8)</strong></p>
<p>06.30 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA + 10 O3 + Multivitamins + Electrolytes</p>
<p>09.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>11.45 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>13.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>16.00 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>17.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein  + Electrolytes</p>
<p>19.00 &#8211; pre workout 12,5 g EAA + Creatine</p>
<p><strong><em>Workout: </em></strong></p>
<p>Lunges w dumbbells 41kg x 5,4,3</p>
<p>Dips BW + 40kg x 5,5,5</p>
<p>Dumbbell rows 43kg x 5,5,5</p>
<p>Standing calf raises 150kg x 6,6</p>
<p><em>Workout 7/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Notes: great workout. Needed a little more rest between sets but strength was good. Not much more to add.  </em></p>
<p>21.00 &#8211; post workout 12,5g EAA + Creatine</p>
<p>22.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein + Electrolytes</p>
<p><strong><em>Day summary:</em></strong><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Mental focus 8/10</em></p>
<p><em>Hunger 5/10</em></p>
<p><em>Irritability 3/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Work today was really good &#8211; full of focus and energy. Training was awesome, some dizziness and pretty heavy breathing but definitely not any decreases in strength. No hunger spikes during the day what so ever. The evening was tougher, mostly because it&#8217;s Friday and I&#8217;ve been awake later than the rest of the week. Can&#8217;t wait for it to be over now, since this is getting to be really mentally draining. Having said that, I feel awesome knowing that the whole work week is over and that I had no problems doing my job &#8211; which was one of my main fears. Also, I did not drop any weight today, which was kind of surprising; guess I’m starting to retain water. Last day tomorrow, afraid it&#8217;s going to be hard since I won&#8217;t have the hectic hospital environment to keep my thoughts off from food. We’ll see…</em></p>
<h3>Day 6 &#8211; Saturday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight:  76,9 kg (-4,5)</strong></p>
<p>06.30 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA + 10 O3 + Multivitamins + Creatine + Electrolytes</p>
<p>09.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>11.45 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>13.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein</p>
<p>16.00 &#8211; 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>17.00 &#8211; 30 g Casein  + 1 Electrolytes</p>
<p>21.00 12,5 g EAA</p>
<p>22.00 40 g Casein</p>
<p><strong><em>Day summary:  </em></strong><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Mental focus 6</em><em>/10</em><em></em></p>
<p><em>Hunger 8</em><em>/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Irritability 7</em><em>/10</em><em> </em></p>
<p><em>Today was a bitch. Been thinking about food constantly, all day. Incredible how much harder things are when I’m at home and not working. Just looking forward for this shit to be over. Note to self: better to start ILCD over the weekend when motivation is at your highest. Also, I&#8217;m never having this nasty-ass Casein drink again. Ever! </em></p>
<h3>Day 7 &#8211; Sunday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight:  76,9 kg (-4,5)</strong></p>
<p><strong><em>Workout:</em></strong><em> </em></p>
<p><em>12 pm fasted glycogen depletion workout:</em></p>
<p>Leg press 3&#215;15</p>
<p>Leg curl 3&#215;15</p>
<p>Press machine 3&#215;15</p>
<p>Lat pulldown 3&#215;15</p>
<p>Lateral raises 2&#215;15</p>
<p>Bicep machine 2&#215;15</p>
<p>Standing calf press 2&#215;15</p>
<p><em>Rested as little as I could possibly handle between sets (30-45sec). Repeated whole cycle twice. </em></p>
<p><em>Notes: doing this after 6 days of not eating carbohydrates and training 3 heavy workouts was incredibly hard. I did enjoy pushing myself to the limit but let&#8217;s just say I&#8217;m lucky there was no food in my stomach to throw up. </em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-970" title="pic2" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/pic2-226x300.jpg" alt="" width="226" height="300" /></p>
<p><em>After the workout I began my 4000 calorie reefed. I managed to squeeze in 4000 calories until 8pm. </em><strong><em> </em></strong></p>
<p><strong><em>Day summary:</em></strong><em> </em></p>
<p><em>No weight loss since yesterday, once again probably due to water retention. If I continued for one more day I&#8217;d probably see another big drop in scale weight (Not gonna happen’). I fasted until my workout at noon and that actually felt really good, high energy levels, and in a good mood. Once again, today proved how much psychology plays a big role in the perception of hunger. Even while fasting until noon, there were no carvings and no hunger, just because I knew that it was over. The workout was one of the toughest things I&#8217;ve ever done, and I&#8217;ve done some pretty crazy training sessions over the years, so this was a surprise. </em></p>
<p><em> </em><em>Reefed was hard for the first few hours; got full really fast and had to take it slow, meaning that the first few hours I took in nothing but oatmeal, fruit, juice and milk. A few hours after starting the reefed, it all felt much better, and I could eat a big heavy meal as per usual.</em></p>
<p><em> </em><em>Tomorrow will probably be a pretty big weight change with saturated (and perhaps even super-compensated) glycogen stores. I&#8217;m planning on having a 1500 calorie day tomorrow which together with the 4000 calorie re-feed should land right at my maintenance intake and show where my &#8220;true&#8221; weight landed, as I’ll be in the same condition as when starting the experiment. </em></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-971" title="fig2" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/fig2.jpg" alt="" width="324" height="484" /></p>
<h3>Monday:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight: 79,9 kg </strong></p>
<p><em>Intake 1500 calories just like planned. Looking bloated and going to the bathroom once every 30 minutes. Feeling good. </em></p>
<h3>Tuesday – END OF EXPERIMENT:</h3>
<p><strong>Morning weight:  79,2 kg (-2,2 kg)</strong></p>
<p><em>I look notably difference from 8 days ago – much fuller and vascular. “Thick, tight and solid…” as they say. Really pleased with the way it turned out. Even other trainees at my gym noticed a big difference and asked how long I’ve been dieting (they did not believe my answer). No problems with returning to maintenance. No cravings or binge eating tendencies that I usually feel when I’ve been experimenting with full 24 hour fasts. Actually, I feel as if last week never happened.</em><br />
<a onclick="window.open('http://www.lift-heavy.com/lh_signup.html','popup','width=300,height=425,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=100,top=200'); return false" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/lh_signup.html">
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-972" title="Ripped Doctor" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/pic3-300x235.jpg" alt="Ripped Doctor Lift-Heavy.com" width="300" height="235" /></p>
<p></a></p>
<h3><span style="color: #ff0000;"><strong>TOTAL 8 DAY WEIGHT LOSS: &#8211; 2,2 kg (4.85 lbs)</strong></span></h3>
<p><strong>Now what?</strong></p>
<p>I see no reason to change the original plan. I will return to my regular training template, and I expect to continue to progress in my main lifts as if last week never happened.</p>
<h2><strong>ILCD – The Conclusions</strong></h2>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="size-full wp-image-973 aligncenter" title="weight loss" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/fig3.jpg" alt="Lift-Heavy.com" width="262" height="390" /></p>
<p>So during an eight day experiment, I lost a total of 2,2 kg (lbs) body weight, without any strength losses. Surprisingly, the workouts a week after the experiment have been absolutely amazing, with incredible personal records <em>way</em> ahead of my planed progress curve. The weight after ILCD has been stable over the course of the week at 79,9 kg after the high 4000 calorie intake day. And at 79,2 kg after the 1500 calorie intake days.</p>
<p>ILCD is an alternative to normal steady state dieting that can be pulled off during shorter periods of time, even if you have very high demands on strength retention and mental capacity. Weight-loss-wise, the six day experiment resulted in the same weight loss as I normally lose on a four week 500 calorie/day deficit, like I was hoping. Now, I’d say that is pretty amazing given that the total volume of activity during a one week period cannot be compared to total volume of activity during a four-week period. If I lost any strength (which I didn’t) I’d have a full three weeks to recover or even increase my strength in a four-week window. Did it suck? Yes, at times it did. However, it lasted for one week and one week only.</p>
<p>Would I do it again? Absolutely! However, I would do a few things differently:</p>
<p>I’d start the experiment on Friday instead of a Monday, since my motivation is at its highest levels over the weekend. Working hours were really easy, the weekend though – not so much. I’d make sure I did the ILCD on a very hectic week which requires me to stay really busy, all the time. Actually, after having a really productive week, it dawned on me how much time you actually spend on food during any given day. And a one week ILCD is the ultimate time saver. Planning to write a book? Design a homepage? Study for a test? Bring your casein, EAA, and supplements and close yourself in a basement for 6 days to be super productive.<br />
Maybe I should package and sell ILCD as the ultimate in weight loss and time management tool.</p>
<h3><strong>Practical takeaways</strong></h3>
<p>There are a few ways I’d use the knowledge acquired with the ILCD experiment to turn myself and others, into sexy beasts. One alternative is to do bursts of ILCD every 4<sup>th</sup> week with 3 weeks of maintenance intake in between, instead of doing consecutive 500 calorie/day deficit dieting. This is for the hard-core trainee since it was pretty challenging in the end, and doing it every 4<sup>th</sup> week will demand everything out of you.</p>
<p>The option I’d prefer, is to get away from longer dieting altogether and stay incredibly lean during the whole year. I will probably add one week of ILCD for each 16-week muscle building period. That would equal to four, one-week periods during the whole year. I’ll never allow myself to add more than 2 kg of body weight to my ideal lean state, and plan on staying in this optimal window without any long and boring 16-week diets.</p>
<p>Since the first two days were really easy, another alternative that might fit you better is even shorter periods of ILCD, but more often. You might do two consecutive days of ILCD, either once a month, or once a week. <strong></strong></p>
<p>Lastly, you can do one week of ILCD at the beginning of a normal, slow, steady state diet to kick start fat loss, increase motivation, build tolerance for hunger and build some mental toughness.</p>
<p><strong>Setup summary: </strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Diet one week on/three weeks off</li>
<li>One week ILCD, 2-4 times during the year (my preference)</li>
<li>Two days at a time once/month</li>
<li>Single days 1-2 times/week, similar to fasting cycles.</li>
</ul>
<h3><strong>Ending Thoughts&#8230;</strong></h3>
<p>Alright, so this piece turned out way longer then I planned. But I really didn’t want to miss a single detail during the entire process. I hope you enjoyed it, and that now you have a few alternatives to long, boring, steady state dieting. If you liked it, please support the enormous effort (and pain) that this experiment took, and sharing this post on your preferred social network. Facebook and Twitter share buttons can be found on you left.</p>
<p>If you have any questions, thoughts or personal experiences about this experiment, please avoid email (as I get a lot) and throw them into the comment section below. I promise to get back to you. Also, I’d love to personally welcome you to the Lift-Heavy family by getting on my list… It costs nothing, is completely awesome, and totally spam free. Trust me, as a doctor who practices upmost confidentiality with his patients, I will treat your information in the exact same manner and never share, rent or sell your email address.<a onclick="window.open('http://www.lift-heavy.com/lh_signup.html','popup','width=300,height=425,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,toolbar=no,directories=no,location=no,menubar=no,status=no,left=100,top=200'); return false" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/lh_signup.html"><strong> =&gt;CLICK HERE</strong></a> to get on my VIP list.</p>
<p>And to end things off, I just want you to remember one thing: Even if we are talking about fat loss and scale numbers, don’t let yourself get too hung up on the figures. I don’t care if you carry 6% or 16% body fat. What I do care about, is the expression on your face when you look in the mirror. Don’t chase numbers – they are just there to illustrate data. Instead, chase the feeling of awesome. It’s all about how you look with a smile on your face, not a caliper in your hand.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-974" title="Doctor With Biceps" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/pic4.jpg" alt="Doctor With Biceps Lift-Heavy.com" width="274" height="364" /></p>
<p><em>- Written with love by Dr.Bojan Kostevski, edited with ferocity by the <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessbook.com/blog" target="_blank">FitJerk</a>. </em></p>
<h4>Bibliography</h4>
<p>1.        Palgi a, Read JL, Greenberg I, Hoefer M a, Bistrian BR, Blackburn GL. Multidisciplinary treatment of obesity with a protein-sparing modified fast: results in 668 outpatients. American journal of public health. 1985 Oct;75(10):1190–4.</p>
<p>2.        Wadden TA, Stunkard AJ, Day SC, Gould RA, Rubin CJ. Less food, less hunger: reports of appetite and symptoms in a controlled study of a protein-sparing modified fast. 1987.</p>
<p>3.        Wadden TA, Stunkard AJ, Brownell KD, Day SC. A comparison of two very-low-calorie diets: protein-sparing-modified fast versus protein-formula-liquid diet. 1985.</p>
<p>4.        Stallings VA, Archibald EH, Pencharz PB. Potassium, magnesium, and calcium balance in obese adolescents on a protein-sparing modified fast. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 1988;47(2):220–4.</p>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/ilcd-diet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>40</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://www.lift-heavy.com/files/ilcd_experiment.mp3" length="11976623" type="audio/mpeg" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#13 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201213/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=geeky-friday-201213</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201213/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 23:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[adiponectin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cardiovascular]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[caseinate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diabetes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[garcinia cambogia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Geeky Friday]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[glucose tollerance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hydroxytric acid]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hypertrophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[kettlebell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[low back]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resistance training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[squat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[triathlon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[whey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=926</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey there my geeky friend, How’s your week been? Mine has been absolutely amazing, the Lift Heavy movement is really starting to spread, the readers are increasing by the day and I’ve never been more motivated to produce awesome content that I hope can increase the quality of your life, one way or another. I [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/imagesCA8C7M6I1.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-933" title="Geeky Friday" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/imagesCA8C7M6I1.jpg" alt="" width="203" height="248" /></a></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em><strong>Hey there my geeky friend,</strong></em></p>
<p>How’s your week been? Mine has been absolutely amazing, the Lift Heavy movement is really starting to spread, the readers are increasing by the day and I’ve never been more motivated to produce awesome content that I hope can increase the quality of your life, one way or another. I want to take this opportunity to <span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>THANK YOU</strong></span> all, for supporting me and my work.  It means the world to me.  The Lift Heavy family has increased by five-fold the last week and I want to welcome all new members to our family. Also a big shootout to my amazing <a title="Consultations" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/consultations/" target="_blank">online clients </a>who have been absolutely KILLING it this week, the progress this week for our group has been nothing but amazing and thank you all for putting in the work. You inspire me every day.</p>
<p>In <a title="Geeky Fridays Vol#12 – 2012" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201212/" target="_blank">last week’s edition </a>of Geeky Friday, I told you about my insanely low calorie diet (ILCD) experiment. I’ve spent the entire week working on that article, and what started as a little diet experiment ended up in a 4000 word beast article. I have only some minor details to add and some proof reading to do so expect the article to be out any day now. I’m absolutely positive you’ll enjoy it.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">→</span></strong>If you want to be one of the first who get to read it, and want to get other <strong>VIP content</strong>, make sure you become the latest member of the steadily growing Lift Heavy family. Add your name and best email in the opt-in box to your right or at the end of the post and I’ll make sure you get on the VIP list. For now, it’s completely <span style="text-decoration: underline;">free</span> so don’t wait!</p>
<p>This week I&#8217;ve got some awesome new abstracts for those of you who are interested in hypertrophy training, kettlebells, triathlon, diabetes, supplementation and much much more! Miss anything? All questions and feedback is massively appreciated so feel free to drop me a comment below.</p>
<p><em>Make sure you keep supporting my work by sharing this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the  massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on</em><em><a href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a></em><em>,</em><em><a href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a></em><em> and</em><em><a href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a></em><em> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly,  feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p>–&gt; Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> </strong><strong><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22158146&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Difference in kinematics and kinetics between high- and low-velocity resistance loading equated by volume: implications for hypertrophy training. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):269-75</p>
<p>Authors: Mohamad NI, Cronin JB, Nosaka KK</p>
<p>Abstract: Although it is generally accepted that a high load is necessary for muscle hypertrophy, it is possible that a low load with a high velocity results in greater kinematics and kinetics than does a high load with a slow velocity. The purpose of this study was to determine if 2 training loads (35 and 70% 1 repetition maximum [1RM]) equated by volume, differed in terms of their session kinematic and kinetic characteristics. Twelve subjects were recruited in this acute randomized within-subject crossover design study. Two bouts of a half-squat exercise were performed 1 week apart, one with high load-low velocity (HLLV = 3 sets of 12 reps at 70% 1RM) and the other with low-load high-velocity (LLHV = 6 sets of 12 reps at 35% 1RM). Time under tension (TUT), average force, peak force (PF), average power (AP), peak power (PP), work (TW), and total impulse (TI) were calculated and compared between loads for the eccentric and concentric phases. For average eccentric and concentric single repetition values, significantly (p &lt; 0.05) greater (∼15-22%) PP outputs were associated with the LLHV loading, whereas significantly greater (∼7-61%) values were associated with the HLLV condition for most other variables of interest. However, in terms of total session kinematics and kinetics, the LLHV protocol resulted in significantly greater (∼16-61%) eccentric and concentric TUT, PF, AP, PP, and TW. The only variable that was significantly greater for the HLLV protocol than for the LLHV protocol was TI (∼20-24%). From these results, it seems that the LLHV protocol may offer an equal if not better training stimulus for muscular adaptation than the HLLV protocol, because of the greater time under tension, power, force, and work output when the total volume of the exercise is equated.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21997449&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Kettlebell swing, snatch, and bottoms-up carry: back and hip muscle activation, motion, and low back loads. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):16-27</p>
<p>Authors: McGill SM,MarshallLW</p>
<p>Abstract: The intent of this study was to quantify spine loading during different kettlebell swings and carries. No previously published studies of tissue loads during kettlebell exercises could be found. Given the popularity of kettlebells, this study was designed to provide an insight into the resulting joint loads. Seven male subjects participated in this investigation. In addition, a single case study of the kettlebell swing was performed on an accomplished kettlebell master. Electromyography, ground reaction forces (GRFs), and 3D kinematic data were recorded during exercises using a 16-kg kettlebell. These variables were input into an anatomically detailed biomechanical model that used normalized muscle activation; GRF; and spine, hip, and knee motion to calculate spine compression and shear loads. It was found that kettlebell swings create a hip-hinge squat pattern characterized by rapid muscle activation-relaxation cycles of substantial magnitudes (∼50% of a maximal voluntary contraction [MVC] for the low back extensors and 80% MVC for the gluteal muscles with a 16-kg kettlebell) resulting in about 3,200 N of low back compression. Abdominal muscular pulses together with the muscle bracing associated with carries create kettlebell-specific training opportunities. Some unique loading patterns discovered during the kettlebell swing included the posterior shear of the L4 vertebra on L5, which is opposite in polarity to a traditional lift. Thus, quantitative analysis provides an insight into why many individuals credit kettlebell swings with restoring and enhancing back health and function, although a few find that they irritate tissues.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22158141&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The effect of aerobic exercise during the interset rest periods on kinematics, kinetics, and lactate clearance of two resistance loading schemes. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):73-9</p>
<p>Authors: Mohamad NI, Cronin JB, Nosaka KK</p>
<p>Abstract: It may be possible to enhance set and session kinematics and kinetics by engaging in low-intensity aerobic exercise during the interset rest period. The purpose of this study therefore was to quantify the change in session kinematics and kinetics of 35% 1RM and 70% 1RM loading schemes equated by volume, when aerobic exercise or passive rest was undertaken between sets. Twelve male student athletes were recruited for this study. Squat average force, peak force, average power, peak power, total work, and total impulse were quantified using a force plate and linear transducer. Blood lactate samples were taken before set 1, after set 1, after set 2, and after the last set performed. No significant (p &lt; 0.05) differences (0.37-9.24%) were found in any of the kinematic and kinetic variables of interset after active or passive interset rest periods. Significant increases (64-76%) in blood lactate occurred from the inception of exercise to completion, for both the heavy and light loading schemes. However, no significant differences in lactate accumulation were noted, whether active or passive recovery was undertaken in the interest rest period. It was concluded that active recovery in the form of low-intensity cycling offered no additional benefits in terms of lactate clearance and enhancement of set and session kinematics and kinetics.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21685815&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">A 7-d exercise program increases high-molecular weight adiponectin in obese adults. </a></h2>
<p>Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012 Jan;44(1):69-74</p>
<p>Authors: Kelly KR, Blaszczak A, Haus JM, Patrick-Melin A, Fealy CE, Solomon TP, Kalinski MI, Kirwan JP</p>
<p>Abstract: PURPOSE: High-molecular weight (HMW) adiponectin is the biologically active form of adiponectin and is related to enhanced insulin sensitivity and metabolic function. Previously, we found that 7 d of exercise improves insulin sensitivity in obese subjects; however, whether short-term exercise training affects HMW adiponectin in obese persons is unknown.</p>
<p>METHODS: We examined the effect of seven consecutive days of supervised vigorous exercise (60 min · d(-1), 85% HRmax) on HMW adiponectin and leptin secretion in 17 obese individuals (age = 55 ± 3 yr; body mass index = 33.7 ± 0.9 kg · m(-2)). Insulin sensitivity was calculated from an oral glucose tolerance test (ISIOGTT) using the Matsuda Index. Fasting plasma HMW adiponectin and leptin were quantified from blood samples obtained before the ISIOGTT. Glucose and insulin measures were obtained before and every 30 min during the test. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry was used to determine body composition, and indirect calorimetry was used to assess fat oxidation.</p>
<p>RESULTS: After the intervention, there was a significant increase in HMW adiponectin (3202 ± 543 vs 3878 ± 682 ng · mL(-1), P = 0.02) and a decrease in leptin (36.8 ± 5.1 vs 31.1 ± 4.2 μg · mL(-1), P = 0.03). Further, we observed an increase in ISIOGTT (1.7 ± 0.3 vs 2.1 ± 0.3, P = 0.04) and a decrease in glucose area under the curve (30,871 ± 2105 vs 28,469 ± 1657 mg · dL(-1) for 3 h, P = 0.01). The increase in HMW adiponectin was positively associated with the increase in basal fat oxidation (r = 0.57, P = 0.03), consistent with an improvement in adipose tissue metabolic function.</p>
<p>CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that 7 d of exercise is sufficient not only to improve insulin sensitivity and fat oxidation but also to favorably alter adipokine secretion, independent of changes in body weight or composition.</p>
<h2></h2>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22212260&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The impact of physical, nutritional, and mental preparation on triathlon performance. </a></h2>
<p>J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2011 Dec;51(4):583-94</p>
<p>Authors:HoustonM, Dolan S, Martin S</p>
<p>Abstract: AIM: There are numerous variables that can impact a triathletes&#8217; performance. Research with this population has primarily focused on physical training habits to determine performance predictors, thus the purpose of this study was to explore the impact of nutritional and mental preparation strategies in addition to physical training on race times of Olympic-distance triathletes.</p>
<p>METHODS: Triathletes were asked to complete an online survey that focused on physical conditioning, nutritional habits, mental training, and educational experience related to triathlon training. Participants included 272 age-group triathletes (146 males, 126 females). ANOVAs and MANOVAs were conducted to identify variables that significantly related to race time, while a logistic regression was used to determine variables that predicted performance.</p>
<p>RESULTS: Race time was predicted by competitive motivation to participate, participation in strength training, and use of intervals during run and swim training. Mental strategies that predicted faster race times included pre-competition routines, use of energizing strategies before a race, and setting outcome goals for races. Nutritional habits did not have an impact on race time.</p>
<p>CONCLUSION: The results support the need to go beyond investigating physical training preparation.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22126720&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Effects of a 2-year school-based daily physical activity intervention on cardiovascular disease risk factors: the Sogndal school-intervention study. </a></h2>
<p>Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011 Dec;21(6):e122-31</p>
<p>Authors: Resaland GK, Anderssen SA, Holme IM, Mamen A, Andersen LB</p>
<p>Abstract: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of a 2-year school-based physical activity (PA) intervention in 9-year-old children on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors. One intervention school (I-school) (n=125) and one control school (C-school) (n=131) were included. The children at the I-school carried out 60 min of PA daily. The PA lessons were planned, organized and led by expert physical education (PE) teachers. In the C-school, children were offered the normal 45 min of PE twice weekly. The intervention resulted in a greater beneficial development in systolic (P=0.003) and diastolic (P=0.002) blood pressure, total cholesterol-to-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio (P=0.011), triglyceride (P=0.030) and peak oxygen uptake (P</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21535185&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Stimulation of muscle protein synthesis by whey and caseinate ingestion after resistance exercise in elderly individuals. </a></h2>
<p>Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011 Dec;21(6):e372-83</p>
<p>Authors: Dideriksen KJ, Reitelseder S, Petersen SG, Hjort M, Helmark IC, Kjaer M, Holm L</p>
<p>Abstract: Sarcopenia is a well-known phenomenon in elderly individuals and resistance exercise together with sufficient amino acid (AA) availability has proved to be a counteractive implement. However, the source of AA and supplement timing require further investigation. The objective was to compare muscle protein synthesis (MPS) to intakes of whey and caseinate after heavy resistance exercise in healthy elderly individuals, and, furthermore, to compare the timing effect of caseinate intake. Twenty-four elderly men and women (mean ± SEM; 68 ± 1 years) were randomized to one of four groups: caseinate intake before exercise (CasPre), caseinate intake immediately after exercise (CasPost), whey intake immediately after exercise (Whey), or intake of a non-caloric control drink (Control). Muscle myofibrillar and collagen fractional synthesis rates (FSR) were measured by a primed continuous infusion of L-[1-(13) C]leucine using labeled proteins during a 6-h recovery period. No differences were observed in muscle myofibrillar and collagen FSR with Whey (0.09 ± 0.01%/h) compared with CasPost (0.09 ± 0.003%/h), and it did not differ between CasPre (0.10 ± 0.01%/h) and CasPost. MPS does not differ with whey and caseinate feeding immediately after heavy resistance exercise in elderly individuals, and MPS is similar with caseinate ingestion before and after exercise.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22158138&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The effects of two bouts of high- and low-volume resistance exercise on glucose tolerance in normoglycemic women. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Jan;26(1):251-60</p>
<p>Authors: Reed ME, Ben-Ezra V, Biggerstaff KD, Nichols DL</p>
<p>Abstract: The purpose of the study was to determine the efficacy of a low-volume, moderate-intensity bout of resistance exercise (RE) on glucose, insulin, and C-peptide responses during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in untrained women compared with a bout of high-volume RE of the same intensity. Ten women (age 30.1 ± 9.0 years) were assessed for body composition, maximal oxygen uptake, and 1-repetition maximum (1RM) before completing 3 treatments administered in random order: 1 set of 10 REs (RE1), 3 sets of 10 REs (RE3), and no exercise (C). Twenty-four hours after completing each treatment, an OGTT was performed after an overnight fast. Glucose area under the curve response to an OGTT was reduced after both RE1 (900 ± 113 mmol·L(-1)·min(-1), p = 0.056) and RE3 (827.9 ± 116.3, p = 0.01) compared with C (960.8 ± 152.7 mmol·L(-1)·min(-1)). Additionally, fasting glucose was significantly reduced after RE3 (4.48 ± 0.45 vs. 4.90 ± 0.44 mmol·L(-1), p = 0.01). Insulin sensitivity (IS), as determined from the Cederholm IS index, was improved after RE1 (10.8%) and after RE3 (26.1%). The reductions in insulin and C-peptide areas after RE1 and RE3 were not significantly different from those in the C treatment. In conclusion, greater benefits in glucose regulation appear to occur after higher volumes of RE. However, observed reductions in glucose, insulin, C-peptide areas after RE1 suggest that individuals who may not well tolerate high-volume RE protocols may still benefit from low-volume RE at moderate intensity (65% 1RM).</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21410546&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Concurrent strength and endurance training improves physical capacity in patients with peripheral arterial disease. </a></h2>
<p>Scand J Med Sci Sports. 2011 Dec;21(6):e308-14</p>
<p>Authors: Mosti MP, Wang E, Wiggen ØN, Helgerud J, Hoff J</p>
<p>Abstract: Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) patients suffer from reduced blood flow to the lower extremities, which causes impaired walking ability. Plantar flexion (PF) endurance training and maximal strength training (MST) induce distinct types of improvements in walking ability in PAD. However, the combined effects of both exercises are still not explored in these patients. This study examined whether concurrent MST and PF training would induce similar training responses as each training mode alone. Ten patients with PAD underwent 8 weeks of concurrent leg press MST and PF training, three times a week. The reference group (n=10) received recommended exercise guidelines. The training group improved treadmill peak oxygen consumption and incremental protocol time to exhaustion with 12.7 ± 7.7% and 12.6 ± 13.2%. Leg press maximal strength and rate of force development improved with 38.3 ± 3.1% and 140.1 ± 40.3%, respectively, along with a 5.2 ± 6.2% within group work economy improvement. No changes appeared in the reference group. Compared with previous studies, concurrent MST and PF training appear to induce similar training responses in PAD patients as when each training mode is executed alone, and without any adverse effects.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22530711&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Evaluation of the Safety and Efficacy of Hydroxycitric Acid or Garcinia cambogia Extracts in Humans. </a></h2>
<p>Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2012 Jul;52(7):585-94</p>
<p>Authors: Márquez F, Babio N, Bulló M, Salas-Salvadó J</p>
<p>Abstract: Several studies have shown that Garcinia cambogia plays an important role in the regulation of endogenous lipid biosynthesis. This effect is specially attributed to (-)-hydroxycitric acid (HCA) inhibiting the enzyme ATP-dependent citrate lyase, which catalyzes the cleavage of citrate to oxaloacetate and acetyl-CoA. Although several studies have found that the administration of G. cambogia extracts is associated with body weight and fat loss in both experimental animals and humans, we should be cautious when interpreting the results as other randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials have not reported the same outcomes. Furthermore, most studies in humans have been conducted on small samples and mainly in the short term. None of them have shown whether these effects persist beyond 12 weeks of intervention. Therefore, there is still little evidence to support the potential effectiveness and long-term benefits of G. cambogia extracts. With regard to toxicity and safety, it is important to note that except in rare cases, studies conducted in experimental animals have not reported increased mortality or significant toxicity. Furthermore, at the doses usually administered, no differences have been reported in terms of side effects or adverse events (those studied) in humans between individuals treated with G. cambogia and controls.</p>
<h2> <span style="color: #ff0000;">→</span> Reminder: Enter your e-mail below if you are interested in becoming the latest member of the Lift Heavy family.</h2>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201213/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#12 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201212/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=geeky-friday-201212</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201212/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2012 23:59:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACL]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bench press]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Bosu ball]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diabetes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[diet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[energy intake]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fat loss]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hypertrophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[squat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strength]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=908</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#160; Dear Geek, glad to have you back! Like I said in last week’s edition of Geeky Friday &#8211; I ran a crazy experiment last week. Now that I&#8217;m back at maintenance intake, I’ve got some really interesting findings to share, and I’ve started to write a post about my experiences and the lessons learned. [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Geek_in_Pink_by_Tymethia.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-913" title="Geek_in_Pink_by_Tymethia" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Geek_in_Pink_by_Tymethia-227x300.jpg" alt="" width="227" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>Dear Geek, glad to have you back!</p>
<p>Like I said in <a title="Geeky Fridays Vol#11 – 2012Geeky Fridays Vol#11 – 2012" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/201211/" target="_blank">last week’s edition </a>of Geeky Friday &#8211; I ran a <strong>crazy</strong> experiment last week. Now that I&#8217;m back at maintenance intake, I’ve got some really interesting findings to share, and I’ve started to write a post about my experiences and the lessons learned. In case you’ve missed my rants on <a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://facebook.com']);" href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a> and <a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://twitter.com']);" href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a>- basically the setup was to stay 2000 calories below my maintenance intake for one week and see what happened when following this 650 calorie ILCD (insanely low calorie diet) with regards to my energy levels, mental energy, strength and other factors.  I’m getting all this awesome and very relevant questions from a lot of you and I’m including most of them in my blog post. <strong>Expect that in the next couple of days.</strong></p>
<p><span style="color: #ff0000;">→</span> If you have any questions of your own about this experiment, please drop the question in the comment section below, or hit me up on <a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://facebook.com']);" href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a> or <a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://twitter.com']);" href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a>.</p>
<p><span style="color: #ff0000;">→</span> Also, l intend to start writing VIP content for the inner circle Lift Heavy family, including free workouts, article notifications and more awesome stuff. If you want to take part of this content, make sure to <strong>enter</strong> <strong>your email</strong> to the right or at the bottom of this post. The Lift Heavy family is steady growing, and I’d love to include you. It’s completely free!</p>
<p>Until next time &#8211; <strong>Geek out</strong>, friends! I hope you find something that catches your interest below. If you have any particular area of interest and want me to look for research in regards to that, please drop me a line in the comment section in the end of this post.</p>
<p><em>Make sure you keep supporting my work by sharing this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the  massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on<a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://facebook.com']);" href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a>,<a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://twitter.com']);" href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a> and<a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://gplus.to']);" href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly,  feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p>–&gt; Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22518835&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Resistance exercise load does not determine training-mediated hypertrophic gains in young men. </a></h2>
<p>J Appl Physiol. 2012 Apr 19;</p>
<p>Authors: Mitchell CJ, Churchward-Venne TA,West DD, Burd NA, Breen L, Baker SK, Phillips SM</p>
<p>Abstract: We have reported that the acute post-exercise increases in muscle protein synthesis rates, with differing nutritional support, are predictive of longer-term training-induced muscle hypertrophy. Here, we aimed to test whether the same was true with acute exercise-mediated changes in muscle protein synthesis. Eighteen men (21±1 yr, 22.6±2.1 kg•m(-2) means±SE) had their legs randomly assigned to two of three training conditions that differed in contraction intensity (% of maximal strength [1RM]) or contraction volume (1 or 3 sets of repetitions): 30%-3, 80%-1 and, 80%-3. Subjects trained each leg with their assigned regime for a period of 10wk, 3 times/wk. We made pre- and post-training measures of strength, muscle volume by magnetic resonance (MR) scans, as well as pre- and post-training biopsies of the vastus lateralis, and a single post-exercise (1h) biopsy following the first bout of exercise, to measure signalling proteins. Training-induced increases in MR-measured muscle volume were significant (P&lt;0.01), with no difference between groups: 30%-3 = 6.8±1.8%, 80%-1 = 3.2±0.8%, and 80%-3= 7.2±1.9%, P=0.18. Isotonic maximal strength gains were not different between 80%-1 and 80%-3, but were greater than 30% -3 (P=0.04), whereas training-induced isometric strength gains were significant but not different between conditions (P =0.92). Biopsies taken 1h following the initial resistance exercise bout showed increased phosphorylation (P&lt;0.05) of p70S6K only in the 80%-1 and 80%-3 conditions. There was no correlation between phosphorylation of any signalling protein and hypertrophy. In accordance with our previous acute measurements of muscle protein synthetic rates a lower load lifted to failure resulted in similar hypertrophy as a heavy load lifted to failure.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22516910&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Comparison between nonlinear and linear periodized resistance training: hypertrophic and strength effects. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 May;26(5):1389-95</p>
<p>Authors: Simão R, Spineti J, de Salles BF, Matta T, Fernandes L, Fleck SJ, Rhea MR, Strom-Olsen HE</p>
<p>Abstract: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of nonlinear periodized (NLP) and linear periodized (LP) resistance training (RT) on muscle thickness (MT) and strength, measured by an ultrasound technique and 1 repetition maximum (1RM), respectively. Thirty untrained men were randomly assigned to 3 groups: NLP (n = 11, age: 30.2 ± 1.1 years, height: 173.6 ±7.2 cm, weight: 79.5 ±13.1 kg), LP (n = 10, age: 29.8 ± 1.9 years, height: 172.0 ±6.8 cm, weight: 79.9 ±10.6 kg), and control group (CG; n = 9, age: 25.9 ± 3.6 years, height: 171.2 ±6.3 cm, weight: 73.9 ±9.9 kg). The right biceps and triceps MT and 1RM strength for the exercises bench press (BP), lat-pull down, triceps extension, and biceps curl (BC) were assessed before and after 12 weeks of training. The NLP program varied training biweekly during weeks 1-6 and on a daily basis during weeks 7-12. The LP program followed a pattern of intensity and volume changes every 4 weeks. The CG did not engage in any RT. Posttraining, both trained groups presented significant 1RM strength gains in all exercises (with the exception of the BP in LP). The 1RM of the NLP group was significantly higher than LP for BP and BC posttraining. There were no significant differences in biceps and triceps MT between baseline and posttraining for any group; however, posttraining, there were significant differences in biceps and triceps MT between NLP and the CG. The effect sizes were higher in NLP for the majority of observed variables. In conclusion, both LP and NLP are effective, but NLP may lead to greater gains in 1RM and MT over a 12-week training period.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22525775&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Aerobic and Resistance Training Effects on Energy Intake: The STRRIDE AT/RT Study: (Exercise Training Effects on Energy Intake). </a></h2>
<p>Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012 Apr 19;</p>
<p>Authors: Bales CW, Hawk VH, Granville EO, Rose SB, Shields T, Bateman L, Willis L, Piner L, Slentz CA, Houmard JA, Gallup D, Samsa GP, Kraus WE</p>
<p>Abstract: PURPOSE: Our study characterizes food and energy intake responses to long-term aerobic (AT) and resistance training (RT) during a controlled 8-month trial. METHODS: In the STRRIDE AT/RT trial, overweight/obese sedentary dyslipidemic men and women were randomized to AT (n = 39), RT (n = 38), or a combined treatment (AT/RT; n = 40) without any advice to change their food intakes. Quantitative food intake assessments (QDI) and food frequency questionnaires (FFQ) were collected at baseline (BEF) and after 8 mo. training (END); body mass (BM) and fat free mass (FFM) were also assessed. RESULTS: In AT and AT/RT, respectively, meaningful decreases in reported energy intake (REI) (-217 and -202 kcal; p &lt; 0.001) and in intakes of fat (-14.9 and-14.9 g; p &lt; 0.001, p = 0.004), protein (-8.3 and-10.7 g; p = 0.002, p &lt; 0.001), and carbohydrate (-28.1 and-14.7 g; p = 0.001, p = 0.030) were found by FFQ. REI relative to FFM decreased (p &lt; 0.001 and p=0.002) as did intakes of fat (-0.2 and-0.3 g; p = 0.003 and p = 0.014) and protein (-0.1 and-0.2 g; p = 0.005 and p &lt; 0.001) in AT and AT/RT and carbohydrate (-0.5 g; p&lt;0.003) in AT only. For RT, REI by QDI decreased (-3.0 kcal/kg FFM; p=0.046), as did fat intake (-0.2 g; p = 0.033). BM decreased in AT (-1.3 kg, p=0.006) and AT/RT (-1.5 kg, p = 0.001) but was unchanged (0.6 kg, p = 0.176) in RT. CONCLUSIONS: Previously sedentary subjects completing 8 months of AT or AT/RT reduced their intakes of kcal and macronutrients and BM. In RT, fat intakes and REI (when expressed per FFM) decreased, BM was unchanged, and FFM increased.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22522495&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Regional muscle glucose uptake remains elevated 1 week after cessation of resistance training independent of altered insulin sensitivity response in older adults with type 2 diabetes. </a></h2>
<p>J Endocrinol Invest. 2012 Apr 5;</p>
<p>Authors: Marcus RL, Addison O, Lastayo PC, Hungerford R, Wende AR, Hoffman JM, Abel ED, McClain DA</p>
<p>Abstract:Background: Aging is associated with a decline in skeletal muscle size. Muscle is critical both for mobility and glucose disposal. While resistance exercise (RE) increases muscle mass and function in the elderly, its role in improving glucose utilization is less clear. Aims: To investigate whether muscle size was linked with insulin sensitivity (IS) in elders with diabetes following RE and if regional muscle glucose uptake differed from systemic glucose utilization. Method: Seven (68.4±5.9 yrs) adults with diabetes participated. After 16 weeks of RE, within 24 hours (post 1) and after 1 week of no exercise (post 2), lean tissue cross-sectional area (CSA) and IS via glucose infusion rate (GIR) were assessed along with a standardized FDG-PET uptake value (SUV). Results: CSA increased between pretest (108.5±35.3 cm2) and post 1 (116.8±40.9 cm2), p=0.02 and did not differ at post 2 (116.0±39.3 cm2). GIR during the 40 mU/m2/min insulin clamp differed between pretest (22.0±15.8 mg/kg/min) and post 1 (67.9±72.8 mg/kg/min), and post 1 and post 2 (25.0±27.2 mg/kg/min), but not between pretest and post 2. GIR results during the 200 mU/ m2/min insulin clamps also differed between pretest and post 1, and post 1 and post 2 but not between pretest and post 2. FDG-SUV increased between pretest (1.1±0.2) and post 1 (1.4±0.3), and remained stable between post 1 and post 2 (1.4±0.4). Conclusion: RE that increased muscle size and FDG-SUV improved IS 24 hours but not 1 week after exercise training.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22516905&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Influence of different resistance exercise loading schemes on mechanical power output in work to rest ratio &#8211; equated and &#8211; nonequated conditions. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 May;26(5):1308-12</p>
<p>Authors:PauloCA, Roschel H, Ugrinowitsch C, Kobal R, Tricoli V</p>
<p>Abstract: It is well known that most sports are characterized by the performance of intermittent high-intensity actions, requiring high muscle power production within different intervals. In fact, the manipulation of the exercise to rest ratio in muscle power training programs may constitute an interesting strategy when considering the specific performance demand of a given sport modality. Thus, the aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of different schemes of rest intervals and number of repetitions per set on muscle power production in the squat exercise between exercise to rest ratio-equated and -nonequated conditions. Nineteen young males (age: 25.7 ± 4.4 years; weight: 81.3 ±13.7 kg; height: 178.1 ±5.5 cm) were randomly submitted to 3 different resistance exercise loading schemes, as follows: short-set short-interval condition (SSSI; 12 sets of 3 repetitions with a 27.3-second interval between sets); short-set long-interval condition (SSLI; 12 sets of 3 repetitions with a 60-second interval between sets); long-set long-interval (LSLI; 6 sets of 6 repetitions with a 60-second rest interval between sets). The main finding of the present study is that the lower exercise to rest ratio protocol (SSLI) resulted in greater average power production (601.88 ± 142.48 W) when compared with both SSSI and LSLI (581.86 ± 113.18 W; 578 ± 138.78 W, respectively). Additionally, both the exercise to rest ratio-equated conditions presented similar performance and metabolic results. In summary, these findings suggest that shorter rest intervals may fully restore the individual&#8217;s ability to produce muscle power if a smaller exercise volume per set is performed and that lower exercise to rest ratio protocols result in greater average power production when compared with higher ratio ones.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22516902&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">The Optimal Back Squat Load for Potential Osteogenesis. </a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 May;26(5):1232-1237</p>
<p>Authors: Ebben WP, Garceau LR, Wurm BJ, Suchomel TJ, Duran K, Petushek EJ</p>
<p>Abstract: The osteogenic potential of exercise is reported to be partially a function of the magnitude of training loads. This study evaluated the ground reaction force (GRF) and rate of force development (RFD) of the eccentric and concentric phases of the back squat at 3 different loads. Twelve subjects performed the back squat on a force platform with loading conditions of 80, 100, and 120% of their 1 repetition maximum (RM). Back squats performed at 120% of the 1RM produced the highest GRF in both the eccentric and concentric conditions. No significant differences were found between RFD for any of the loading conditions. Performing the back squat at loads of 120% of the estimated 1RM, accomplished with reduced range of motion, results in higher GRF than the back squat performed at 80 or 100% of the 1RM. Thus, supermaximal back squat loads in excess of the 1RM, with decreased range of motion, may be a useful part of a resistance training program designed to maximize osteogenic potential.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22530196&amp;dopt=Abstract">The effectiveness of resistance training using unstable surfaces and devices for rehabilitation.</a></h2>
<p>Authors: Behm D, Colado JC</p>
<p>Abstract: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: WHILE THE POPULARITY OF INSTABILITY RESISTANCE TRAINING (RESISTANCE TRAINING THAT INVOLVES THE USE OF UNSTABLE SURFACES AND DEVICES: IRT) is evident in fitness training facilities, its effectiveness for optimal sport performance training has been questioned. The purpose of this clinical commentary is to explore the resistance training literature, which implements the use of unstable surfaces and devices to determine the suitability of IRT for rehabilitation. DESCRIPTION OF TOPIC AND RELATED EVIDENCE: The criticism of IRT for athletic conditioning is based on the findings of impaired kinetic measures such as force, power and movement velocity during a bout of IRT compared to traditional resistance training with more stable surfaces or devices. However, these deficits occur concurrently with minimal changes or in some cases increases in trunk and limb muscle activation. Compared to the kinetic deficits that are reported during unstable resistance exercises, the relatively greater trunk muscle activation indicates a greater stabilizing function for the muscles. IRT exercises can also provide training adaptations for coordination and other motor control issues, which may be more important for low back pain rehabilitation than strength or power enhancements. RELATION TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Improvements in postural stability from balance training without resistance can improve force output which can then lead to a training progression involving an amalgamation of balance and IRT leading to higher load traditional resistance training.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22527891&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Exercise and nutritional interventions for improving aging muscle health. </a></h2>
<p>Endocrine. 2012 Apr 21;</p>
<p>Authors:ForbesSC, Little JP, Candow DG</p>
<p>Abstract: Skeletal muscle mass declines with age (i.e., sarcopenia) resulting in muscle weakness and functional limitations. Sarcopenia has been associated with physiological changes in muscle morphology, protein and hormonal kinetics, insulin resistance, inflammation, and oxidative stress. The purpose of this review is to highlight how exercise and nutritional intervention strategies may benefit aging muscle. It is well known that resistance exercise training increases muscle strength and size and evidence also suggests that resistance training can increase mitochondrial content and decrease oxidative stress in older adults. Recent findings suggest that fast-velocity resistance exercise may be an effective intervention for older adults to enhance muscle power and functional capacity. Aerobic exercise training may also benefit aging skeletal muscle by enhancing mitochondrial bioenergetics, improving insulin sensitivity, and/or decreasing oxidative stress. In addition to exercise, creatine monohydrate, milk-based proteins, and essential fatty acids all have biological effects which could enhance some of the physiological adaptations from exercise training in older adults. Additional research is needed to determine whether skeletal muscle adaptations to increased activity in older adults are further enhanced with effective nutritional interventions and whether this is due to enhanced muscle protein synthesis, improved mitochondrial function, and/or a reduced inflammatory response.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22526252&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">Exercise-induced muscle damage from bench press exercise impairs arm cranking endurance performance. </a></h2>
<p>Eur J Appl Physiol. 2012 Apr 24;</p>
<p>Authors:DoncasterGG, Twist C</p>
<p>Abstract: The effects of exercise-induced muscle damage (EIMD) on the physiological, metabolic and perceptual responses during upper body arm cranking exercise are unknown. Nine physically active male participants performed 6 min of arm cranking exercise at ventilatory threshold (VT), followed by a time to exhaustion (TTE) trial at a workload corresponding to 80 % of the difference between VT and [Formula: see text] 48 h after bench pressing exercise (10 × 6 repetitions at 70 % one repetition maximum) or 20 min sitting (control). Reductions in isokinetic strength and increased muscle soreness of the elbow flexors and extensors were evident at 24 and 48 h after bench pressing exercise (P &lt; 0.05). Despite no change in [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], HR and blood lactate concentration ([Bla]) between conditions (P &gt; 0.05), rating of perceived exertion (RPE) was higher during the 6 min arm cranking after bench pressing exercise compared to the control condition (P &lt; 0.05). TTE was reduced in the treatment condition (207.2 ± 91.9 cf. 293.4 ± 75.6 s; P &lt; 0.05), as were end [Formula: see text] (P &lt; 0.05) and [Bla] at 0, 5 and 10 min after exercise (P &lt; 0.05). RPE during the TTE trial was higher after bench pressing (P &lt; 0.05), although end RPE was not different between conditions (P &gt; 0.05). This study provides evidence that EIMD caused by bench pressing exercise increases the sense of effort during arm cranking exercise that leads to a reduced exercise tolerance. The findings have implications for individuals participating in concurrent endurance and resistance training of the upper body.</p>
<h2><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22525777&amp;dopt=Abstract" target="_blank">RCT of the Effects of a Trunk Stabilization Program on Trunk Control and Knee Loading. </a></h2>
<p>Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012 Apr 19;</p>
<p>Authors:Jamison ST, McNeilan RJ, Young GS, Givens DL, Best TM, Chaudhari AM</p>
<p>Abstract: BACKGROUND: Many athletic maneuvers involve coordination of movement between the lower and upper extremities, suggesting better core muscle utilization may lead to improved athletic performance and reduced injury risk. PURPOSE: To determine to what extent a training program with quasi-static trunk stabilization exercises would improve measures of core performance, leg strength, agility, and dynamic knee loading, compared to a program incorporating only resistance training. METHODS: 37 male subjects were randomly assigned to either a resistance training only (RT) or a resistance and trunk stabilization (TS) training program, each lasting 6 weeks. Core strength and endurance, trunk control, knee loading during unanticipated cutting, leg strength, and agility were collected pre- and post-training. RESULTS: Between-group analyses showed the TS group significantly improved only core endurance when compared to the RT group (side bridge; p=0.050). Within-group analyses showed the TS group improved lateral core strength (MVIC, cable on non-dominant side; 44.5±61.3N, p=0.037). Both groups increased leg strength (deadlift 1RM; TS: 55.1±46.5lbs, p=0.003; RT: 33.4±17.5lbs, p&lt;0.001) and decreased sagittal plane trunk control (sudden force release (SFR) test; cable in front; TS: 2.54±3.68°, p=0.045; RT: 3.47±2.83°, p=0.004), but only the RT group decreased lateral trunk control (SFR; cable on dominant side; 1.36±1.65°, p=0.029). The RT group improved standing broad jump (73.2±108.4mm, p=0.049), but also showed increased knee abduction moment during unanticipated cutting (1.503 fold increase [%bw*ht], p=0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Quasi-static trunk stabilization exercises did not improve core strength, trunk control or knee loading relative to resistance training, potentially because of a lack of exercises including unexpected perturbations and dynamic movement. Together these results suggest the potential importance of targeted trunk control training to address these known ACL injury risk factors.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<h3> <span style="color: #ff0000;">→</span> Reminder: Enter your e-mail below if you are interested in becoming the latest member of the Lift Heavy family.</h3>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-201212/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>9</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#11 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/201211/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=201211</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/201211/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Apr 2012 23:59:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[arthritis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BCAA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[betaine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creatine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diabetes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EIPAH]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[power clean]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[powerlifting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[squat]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=887</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Welcome back to another hot edition of Geeky Friday. Hope you have all had an awesome week and are ready to own the weekend. First of all, thank you all SO MUCH for the support I’ve been getting for writing these posts, the feedback has been nothing short of AMAZING. Really appreciate all the kind [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/nerd-girl-1.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-888 aligncenter" title="nerd girl 1" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/nerd-girl-1.jpg" alt="" width="299" height="299" /></a></p>
<p>Welcome back to another hot edition of Geeky Friday. Hope you have all had an awesome week and are ready to own the weekend.</p>
<p>First of all, thank you all<span style="text-decoration: underline;"> SO MUCH</span> for the support I’ve been getting for writing these posts, the feedback has been nothing short of AMAZING. Really appreciate all the kind words, facebook shares, emails and twitter re-tweets. That stuff is what keeps me going.</p>
<p>I’ve had a good week, kicking of my fat loss with a<strong> ILCD</strong> (Insanely Low Calorie Diet), a long planned experiment of mine &#8211; basically eating at my maintenance calorie intake minus 2000 calories and condensing a four week diet into one week. I’m keeping a diary over the whole trial, and once the week is through (and I get to eat food again) I’ll analyze the whole experience and share it in a big blog post, so stay tuned for that.</p>
<p>Here’s some fresh abstracts for you to dig right into.</p>
<p>Much love,</p>
<p>BK</p>
<p><em>Make sure you keep supporting my work by sharing this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the  massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on<a href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a>,<a href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a> and<a href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly,  feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p>&#8211;&gt; Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22505136&amp;dopt=Abstract">A biomechanical comparison of the traditional squat, powerlifting squat and box squat.</a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Apr 10;</p>
<p>Authors: Swinton PA, Lloyd R, Keogh JW, Agouris I, Stewart AD</p>
<p>Abstract:The purpose of this study was to compare the biomechanics of the traditional squat with two popular exercise variations commonly referred to as the powerlifting squat and box squat. Twelve male powerlifters performed the exercises with 30, 50 and 70% of their measured 1RM, with instruction to lift the loads as fast as possible. Inverse dynamics and spatial tracking of the external resistance were used to quantify biomechanical variables. A range of significant kinematic and kinetic differences (p&lt;0.05) emerged between the exercises. The traditional squat was performed with a narrow stance, whereas the powerlifting squat and box squat were performed with similar wide stances (48.3 ± 3.8cm, 89.6 ± 4.9cm, 92.1 ± 5.1cm, respectively). During the eccentric phase of the traditional squat the knee travelled past the toes resulting in anterior displacement of the system center of mass (COM). In contrast, during the powerlifting squat and box squat a more vertical shin position was maintained, resulting in posterior displacements of the system COM. These differences in linear displacements had a significant effect (p&lt;0.05) on a number of peak joint moments, with the greatest effects measured at the spine and ankle. For both joints the largest peak moment was produced during the traditional squat, followed by the powerlifting squat, then box squat. Significant differences (p&lt;0.05) were also noted at the hip joint where the largest moment in all 3 planes were produced during the powerlifting squat. Coaches and athletes should be aware of the biomechanical differences between the squatting variations and select according to the kinematic and kinetic profile that best match the training goals.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22496538&amp;dopt=Abstract">Effect of 12-Week Resistance Exercise Program on Body Composition, Muscle Strength, Physical Function, and Glucose Metabolism in Healthy, Insulin-Resistant, and Diabetic Elderly Icelanders.</a></h2>
<p dir="ltr">J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2012 Apr 10;</p>
<p dir="ltr">Authors: Geirsdottir OG, Arnarson A, Briem K, Ramel A, Jonsson PV, Thorsdottir I</p>
<p dir="ltr">Abstract:BACKGROUND: Insulin is a stimulator of skeletal muscle protein anabolism and insulin resistance might therefore negatively affect muscle protein metabolism. We investigated muscle mass and physical function before and after a resistance exercise program in participants with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in comparison to healthy controls. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled intervention designed to investigate resistance training among older adults. Glucose metabolism status was not a selection criteria for the trial, and group designation was done retrospectively. Participants (N = 237, 73.7 ± 5.7 y, 58.2% women) participated in a 12-week resistance exercise program (3 times/week; three sets, six to eight repetitions at 75%-80% of the one-repetition maximum), designed to increase strength and muscle mass of major muscle groups. Body composition, muscular strength, timed up and go test, 6-minute walk for distance, and blood chemical variables were measured at baseline and endpoint. RESULTS: Participants completing the study (n = 213) experienced significant changes in muscle strength or muscle function, which did not differ significantly between healthy (n = 198), prediabetic (n = 20), and T2DM participants (n = 17). Changes in serum glucose during the intervention differed by group: only glucose improved significantly in the prediabetic group, glucose and triacylglycerol improved significantly in the healthy group, whereas no serum parameter improved significantly in the T2DM group. CONCLUSIONS: A 12-week resistance exercise program improves muscle strength and muscle function to a similar extent in healthy, prediabetic, and T2DM elderly people. However, according to our data, T2DM participants do not experience favorable changes in fasting glucose or HbA(1C).</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22080314&amp;dopt=Abstract">Creatine supplementation decreases oxidative DNA damage and lipid peroxidation induced by a single bout of resistance exercise.</a></h2>
<p dir="ltr">J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Dec;25(12):3448-55</p>
<p dir="ltr">Authors: Rahimi R</p>
<p dir="ltr">Abstract:Rahimi, R. Creatine supplementation decreases oxidative DNA damage and lipid peroxidation induced by a single bout of resistance exercise. J Strength Cond Res 25(12): 3448-3455, 2011-Creatine (Cr), or methyl guanidine-acetic acid, can be either ingested from exogenous sources, such as fish or meat, or produced endogenously by the body, primarily in the liver. It is used as an ergogenic aid to improve muscle mass, strength, and endurance. Heretofore, Cr&#8217;s positive therapeutic benefits in various oxidative stress-associated diseases have been reported in the literature and, recently, Cr has also been shown to exert direct antioxidant effects. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of an acute bout of resistance exercise (RE) on oxidative stress response and oxidative DNA damage in male athletes and whether supplementation with Cr could negate any observed differences. Twenty-seven resistance-trained men were randomly divided into a Cr supplementation group (the Cr group [21.6 ± 3.6 years], taking 4 × 5 g Cr monohydrate per day) or a placebo (PL) supplementation group (the PL group [21.2 ± 3.2 years], taking 4 × 5 g maltodextrin per day). A double-blind research design was employed for a 7-day supplementation period. Before and after the seventh day of supplementation, the subjects performed an RE protocol (7 sets of 4 exercises using 60-90 1 repetition maximum) in the flat pyramid loading pattern. Blood and urine samples taken before, immediately, and 24-hour postexercise were analyzed for plasma malondialdehyde (MDA) and urinary 8-hydroxy-2-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) excretion. Before the supplementation period, a significant increase in the urinary 8-OHdG excretion and plasma MDA levels was observed after RE. The Cr supplementation induces a significant increase in athletics performance, and it attenuated the changes observed in the urinary 8-OHdG excretion and plasma MDA. These results indicate that Cr supplementation reduced oxidative DNA damage and lipid peroxidation induced by a single bout of RE.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22080325&amp;dopt=Abstract">Kinetic comparisons during variations of the power clean.</a></h2>
<p dir="ltr">J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Dec;25(12):3269-73</p>
<p dir="ltr">Authors: Comfort P, Allen M, Graham-Smith P</p>
<p dir="ltr">Abstract: The aim of this investigation was to determine the differences in peak power, peak vertical ground reaction forces, and rate of force development (RFD) during variations of the power clean. Elite rugby league players (n = 16; age 22 ± 1.58 years; height 182.25 ± 2.81 cm; body mass 98.65 ± 7.52 kg) performed 1 set of 3 repetitions of the power clean, hang power clean, midthigh power clean, or midthigh clean pull, using 60% of 1 repetition maximum power clean, in a randomized order, while standing on a force platform. One-way analysis of variance with Bonferroni post hoc analysis revealed a significantly (p &lt; 0.001) greater peak power output during the midthigh power clean (3,565.7 ± 410.6 W) and the midthigh clean pull (3,686.8 ± 386.5 W) compared with both the power clean (2,591.2 ± 645.5 W) and the hang power clean (3,183.6 ± 309.1 W), along with a significantly (p &lt; 0.001) greater peak Fz during the midthigh power clean (2,813.8 ± 200.5 N) and the midthigh clean pull (2,901.3 ± 226.1 N) compared with both the power clean (2,264.1 ± 199.6 N) and the hang power clean (2,479.3 ± 267.6 N). The midthigh power clean (15,049.8 ± 4,415.7 N·s) and the midthigh clean pull (15,623.6 ± 3,114.4 N·s) also demonstrated significantly (p &lt; 0.001) greater instantaneous RFD when compared with both the power clean (8,657.9 ± 2,746.6 N·s) and the hang power clean (10,314.4 ± 4,238.2 N·s). From the findings of this study, when training to maximize power, Fz, and RFD, the midthigh power clean and midthigh clean pull appear to be the most advantageous variations of the power clean to perform.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22080324&amp;dopt=Abstract">The effects of chronic betaine supplementation on exercise performance, skeletal muscle oxygen saturation and associated biochemical parameters in resistance trained men.</a></h2>
<p dir="ltr">J Strength Cond Res. 2011 Dec;25(12):3461-71</p>
<p dir="ltr">Authors: Trepanowski JF, Farney TM, McCarthy CG, Schilling BK, Craig SA, Bloomer RJ</p>
<p dir="ltr">Abstract:We examined the effects of chronic betaine supplementation on exercise performance and associated parameters in resistance trained men. Men were randomly assigned in a double-blind manner using a crossover design to consume betaine (2.5 g of betaine mixed in 500 ml of Gatorade®) or a placebo (500 ml of Gatorade®) for 14 days, with a 21-day washout period. Before and after each treatment period, tests of lower- and upper-body muscular power and isometric force were conducted, including a test of upper-body muscular endurance (10 sets of bench press exercise to failure). Muscle tissue oxygen saturation (StO2) during the bench press protocol was measured via near infrared spectroscopy. Blood samples were collected before and after the exercise test protocol for analysis of lactate, nitrate/nitrite (NOx), and malondialdehyde (MDA). When analyzed using a repeated measures analysis of variance, no significant differences were noted between conditions for exercise performance variables (p &gt; 0.05). However, an increase in total repetitions (p = 0.01) and total volume load (p = 0.02) in the 10-set bench press protocol was noted with betaine supplementation (paired t-tests), with values increasing approximately 6.5% from preintervention to postintervention. Although not of statistical significance (p = 0.14), postexercise blood lactate increased to a lesser extent with betaine supplementation (210%) compared with placebo administration (270%). NOx was lower postintervention as compared with preintervention (p = 0.06), and MDA was relatively unchanged. The decrease in StO2 during the bench press protocol was greater with betaine vs. placebo (p = 0.01), possibly suggesting enhanced muscle oxygen consumption. These findings indicate that betaine supplementation results in a moderate increase in total repetitions and volume load in the bench press exercise, without favorably impacting other performance measures.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22505056&amp;dopt=Abstract">A comparison of the acute haemodynamic response to aerobic and resistance exercise in subjects with exercise-induced pulmonary arterial hypertension.</a></h2>
<p><strong><strong><strong><br />
</strong></strong></strong>Eur J Prev Cardiolog. 2012 Apr 13;<br />
Authors: Fowler RM, Maiorana AJ, Jenkins SC, Gain KR, O&#8217;Driscoll G, Gabbay E</p>
<p>Abstract:Background: Exercise-induced pulmonary arterial hypertension (EIPAH) is associated with reduced exercise capacity and abnormal central haemodynamic responses to maximal aerobic exercise. Aerobic and resistance exercise training are commonly employed to treat reduced exercise capacity; however, the haemodynamic response to aerobic and resistance exercise, at training intensities, in subjects with EIPAH is unknown.Methods: Fourteen subjects (11 with scleroderma, 12 females) with EIPAH underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing on a cycle ergometer, a one-repetition maximum (1RM) strength test and resistance exercise at 40% and 60% of maximum on a bilateral leg press machine. All tests were performed with a pulmonary artery catheter in situ. Haemodynamic and symptomatic responses to aerobic and resistance exercise, performed at 40% of peak oxygen consumption and 40% of 1RM, and at 60% of peak oxygen consumption and 60% of 1RM, were compared. For maximal exercise, the highest haemodynamic responses recorded during the cycling and 1RM tests were compared.Results: There were no differences in haemodynamic or symptomatic responses between the two modalities of submaximal exercise. At maximal exercise, all haemodynamic and symptomatic responses were lower during resistance compared with aerobic exercise (p &lt; 0.05).Conclusions: At the intensities studied, lower-limb resistance exercise was well tolerated and was mostly associated with similar or lower haemodynamic responses compared with aerobic exercise, in subjects with EIPAH.<strong><strong><strong></strong></strong></strong></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22503429&amp;dopt=Abstract">Changes in voluntary quadriceps activation predict changes in quadriceps strength after therapeutic exercise in patients with knee osteoarthritis.</a></h2>
<p><strong><strong><strong><br />
</strong></strong></strong>Knee. 2012 Apr 13;</p>
<p>Authors: Pietrosimone BG, Saliba SA</p>
<p>Abstract INTRODUCTION: Recent rehabilitation paradigms have suggested that improving voluntary muscle activation may optimize strength outcomes related to resistance training. The aim of this study was to determine if changes in voluntary quadriceps activation could predict changes in quadriceps strength following a 4 week therapeutic exercise regimen. METHOD: Thirty-six participants with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis volunteered for this study, while 30 participants (14 males, 16 females, 58±11.8years, 172.2±9.2cm, 87.1±18.5kg) finished the 4 week supervised therapeutic exercise protocol and were used in the final analysis. Demographics, quadriceps strength and voluntary quadriceps activation using the burst superimposition technique were evaluated prior to the intervention. Following the therapeutic exercise program, quadriceps strength and voluntary activation were assessed. Simple correlations were performed to determine covariates in a multiple regression equation to evaluate if changes in voluntary quadriceps activation could predict changes in quadriceps strength. RESULTS: There was a significant moderate simple correlation between participant height and change in MVIC (r=-0.44, P=0.01). Both height and changes in voluntary quadriceps activation significantly predicted changes in MVIC (R(2)=0.66, P&lt;0.001). After controlling for patient height, a change in voluntary quadriceps activation produced a significant improvement in the prediction of a change in MVIC (ΔR(2)=0.47, P&lt;0.001). DISCUSSION: Changes in voluntary quadriceps activation predicted 47% of variance in the change in quadriceps strength. These results suggest that interventions aimed at manipulating quadriceps activation may be helpful for improving quadriceps strength in patients with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22127230&amp;dopt=Abstract">Intake of branched-chain amino acids influences the levels of MAFbx mRNA and MuRF-1 total protein in resting and exercising human muscle.</a></h2>
<p><strong><strong><strong><br />
</strong></strong></strong>Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab. 2012 Mar;302(5):E510-21</p>
<p>Authors: Borgenvik M, Apró W, Blomstrand E</p>
<p>Abstract: Resistance exercise and amino acids are two major factors that influence muscle protein turnover. Here, we examined the effects of resistance exercise and branched-chain amino acids (BCAA), individually and in combination, on the expression of anabolic and catabolic genes in human skeletal muscle. Seven subjects performed two sessions of unilateral leg press exercise with randomized supplementation with BCAA or flavored water. Biopsies were collected from the vastus lateralis muscle of both the resting and exercising legs before and repeatedly after exercise to determine levels of mRNA, protein phosphorylation, and amino acid concentrations. Intake of BCAA reduced (P &lt; 0.05) MAFbx mRNA by 30 and 50% in the resting and exercising legs, respectively. The level of MuRF-1 mRNA was elevated (P &lt; 0.05) in the exercising leg two- and threefold under the placebo and BCAA conditions, respectively, whereas MuRF-1 total protein increased by 20% (P &lt; 0.05) only in the placebo condition. Phosphorylation of p70(S6k) increased to a larger extent (∼2-fold; P &lt; 0.05) in the early recovery period with BCAA supplementation, whereas the expression of genes regulating mTOR activity was not influenced by BCAA. Muscle levels of phenylalanine and tyrosine were reduced (13-17%) throughout recovery (P &lt; 0.05) in the placebo condition and to a greater extent (32-43%; P &lt; 0.05) following BCAA supplementation in both resting and exercising muscle. In conclusion, BCAA ingestion reduced MAFbx mRNA and prevented the exercise-induced increase in MuRF-1 total protein in both resting and exercising leg. Further-more, resistance exercise differently influenced MAFbx and MuRF-1 mRNA expression, suggesting both common and divergent regulation of these two ubiquitin ligases.<br />
<strong><strong><strong><br />
</strong></strong></strong></p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22492681&amp;dopt=Abstract">Improving physical self-perception in adolescent boys from disadvantaged schools: psychological outcomes from the Physical Activity Leaders randomized controlled trial.</a></h2>
<p>Pediatr Obes. 2012 Apr 10;</p>
<p>Authors: Morgan PJ, Saunders KL, Lubans DR</p>
<p>Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of a school-based obesity prevention programme on physical self-perception and key physical-activity related cognitions in adolescent boys from disadvantaged secondary schools. A secondary objective was to determine if any psychological changes were associated with improved weight status. METHODS: Participants (n = 100, age = 14.3[0.6]) were randomized to the PALS (Physical Activity Leaders) intervention (n = 50) or a control group (n = 50) and assessed at baseline, 3- and 6-month follow up. Measures included BMI, BMI z-score and % body fat (bioelectrical impedance analysis). Students also completed the Children&#8217;s Physical Self-Perception Profile and a physical activity-related cognitions questionnaire. The findings include secondary data analyses. RESULTS: Relative to the controls, the PALS group significantly increased their physical self worth (p = .01), perceived physical condition (p = .02), resistance training self efficacy (p &lt; .001) and their use of physical activity behavioural strategies (p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: A school-based obesity prevention programme that targeted leadership skills improved psychological health in the physical domain in adolescent boys from disadvantaged schools.<strong><strong id="internal-source-marker_0.09405825939029455"></strong></strong></p>
<p><strong>&#8211;&gt; Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</strong></p>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/201211/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#10 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/httpwww-lift-heavy-comgeeky-friday-201210/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=httpwww-lift-heavy-comgeeky-friday-201210</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/httpwww-lift-heavy-comgeeky-friday-201210/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2012 07:20:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ballistic training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diabetes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[occlusion]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[patellofemoral pain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recovery]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[squat]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strength]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trainng]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[volleyball]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=873</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey guys, Time for yet another another edition of Geeky Friday. Hope you have all had an awesome week. I&#8217;ve been on vacation, basically doing nothing but sleeping, watching movies, doing some programming for some new fat loss clients, lifting heavy stuff, and spending time with friends and family. Hit a big squat PR this week as well so [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter" title="Geeky friday" src="http://a4.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/546347_10151492623285331_654480330_23566047_442515125_n.jpg" alt="" width="403" height="302" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><strong>Hey guys,</strong></p>
<p>Time for yet another another edition of Geeky Friday. Hope you have all had an awesome week. I&#8217;ve been on vacation, basically doing nothing but sleeping, watching movies, doing some programming for some <a title="Consultations" href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/consultations/" target="_blank">new fat loss clients</a>, lifting heavy stuff, and spending time with friends and family. Hit a big squat PR this week as well so everything feels pretty damn good. I&#8217;ve made some insane progress training-wise these last six months, adding 20 kilos to my bench press and more than 30 kilos to my squat. Added about 10 kilos of body weight, abs still visible and quads still veiny. Officially starting my cut next week, can&#8217;t wait to see if there is a noticeable difference once the fat has been completely stripped of. I&#8217;ll keep you guys posted.</p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><img class="aligncenter" title="Back" src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-adv1roMDA24/Thlv0VIE3bI/AAAAAAAAACY/if5-f5diJYc/s855/DSC03675.JPG" alt="" width="319" height="239" /></p>
<p style="text-align: center;"><em>After my last cut</em></p>
<p>Ok, now lets get to the abstracts! Geek out friends, talk to you next week!</p>
<p><em>Make sure you share this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the  massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on<a href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a>,<a href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a> and<a href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly,  feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p><strong>Have an awesome weekend everybody!</strong></p>
<p>In strength,</p>
<p><strong>Bojan</strong></p>
<p>PS. Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22486342&amp;dopt=Abstract">Effects of resistance or aerobic exercise training on total and regional body composition in sedentary overweight middle-aged adults.</a></h2>
<p>Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2012 Apr 9;</p>
<p>Authors: Donges CE, Duffield R</p>
<p>Abstract:The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of 10 weeks of aerobic endurance training (AET), resistance exercise training (RET), or a control (CON) condition on absolute and relative fat mass (FM) or fat-free mass (FFM) in the total body (TB) and regions of interest (ROIs) of sedentary overweight middle-aged males and females. Following prescreening, 102 subjects underwent anthropometric measurements, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and strength and aerobic exercise testing. Randomized subjects (male RET, n = 16; female RET, n = 19; male AET, n = 16; and female AET, n = 25) completed supervised and periodized exercise programs (AET, 30-50 min cycling at 70%-75% maximal heart rate; RET, 2-4 sets × 8-10 repetitions of 5-7 exercises at 70%-75% 1 repetition maximum) or a nonexercising control condition (male CON, n = 13 and female CON, n = 13). Changes in absolute and relative TB-FM and TB-FFM and ROI-FM and ROI-FFM were determined. At baseline, and although matched for age and body mass index, males had greater strength, aerobic fitness, body mass, absolute and relative TB-FFM and ROI-FFM, but reduced absolute and relative TB-FM and ROI-FM, compared with females (p &lt; 0.05). After training, both female exercise groups showed equivalent or greater relative improvements in strength and aerobic fitness than did the male exercise groups (p &lt; 0.05); however, the male exercise groups increased TB-FFM and reduced TB-FM more than did the female exercise groups (p &lt; 0.05). Male AET altered absolute FM more than male RET altered absolute FFM, thus resulting in a greater enhancement of relative FFM. Despite equivalent or greater responses to RET or AET by female subjects, the corresponding respective increases in FFM or reductions in FM were lower than those in males, indicating that a biased dose-response relationship exists between sexes following 10 weeks of exercise training.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22152078&amp;dopt=Abstract">Effect of different types of lower body resistance training on arterial compliance and calf blood flow.</a></h2>
<p>Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2012 Jan;32(1):45-51</p>
<p>Authors: Fahs CA, Rossow LM, Loenneke JP, Thiebaud RS, Kim D, Bemben DA, Bemben MG</p>
<p>Abstract: Low-intensity resistance exercise combined with blood flow restriction has been shown to produce comparable increases in muscle strength and hypertrophy as traditional high-intensity (HI) resistance training. However, the vascular effects of low-intensity blood flow-restricted (LI-BFR) exercise training are not well characterized. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the vascular effects of LI-BFR, moderate-intensity (MI), and HI resistance exercise training. Forty-six young men were divided into four groups: a HI, MI or LI-BFR lower body resistance training group or a non-exercise control group (C). Blood pressure, arterial compliance and calf vascular conductance (CVC) were assessed before and after the 6-week intervention. After the intervention, CVC was significantly increased in the three exercise groups combined compared with C (47·5 ± 3·1 versus 35·0 ± 4·5 flow per mmHg) without any changes in arterial compliance in any group. These results suggest HI, MI and LI-BFR lower body resistance exercises increase CVC, but do not affect arterial compliance. LI-BFR resistance exercise may be an effective alternative to HI resistance exercise for improving vascular conductance for individuals unable to perform HI resistance exercise. As more evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of LI-BFR resistance exercise continues to mount, this may provide a research base for prescribing this type of exercise if and/or when this type of exercise becomes more available worldwide.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22484082&amp;dopt=Abstract">Promoting lower extremity strength in elite volleyball players: Effects of two combined training methods.</a></h2>
<p>J Sci Med Sport. 2012 Apr 6;</p>
<p>Authors: Voelzke M, Stutzig N, Thorhauer HA, Granacher U</p>
<p>Abstract: OBJECTIVES: To compare the impact of short term training with resistance plus plyometric training (RT+P) or electromyostimulation plus plyometric training (EMS+P) on explosive force production in elite volleyball players. DESIGN: Sixteen elite volleyball players of the first German division participated in a training study. METHODS: The participants were randomly assigned to either the RT+P training group (n=8) or the EMS+P training group (n=8). Both groups participated in a 5-week lower extremity exercise program. Pre and post tests included squat jumps (SJ), countermovement jumps (CMJ), and drop jumps (DJ) on a force plate. The three-step reach height (RH) was assessed using a custom-made vertec apparatus. Fifteen m straight and lateral sprint (S15s and S15l) were assessed using photoelectric cells with interims at 5m and 10m. RESULTS: RT+P training resulted in significant improvements in SJ (+2.3%) and RH (+0.4%) performance. The EMS+P training group showed significant increases in performance of CMJ (+3.8%), DJ (+6.4%), RH (+1.6%), S15l (-3.8%) and after 5m and 10m of the S15s (-2.6%; -0.5%). The comparison of training-induced changes between the two intervention groups revealed significant differences for the SJ (p=0.023) in favor of RT+P and for the S15s after 5m (p=0.006) in favor of EMS+P. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that RT+P training is effective in promoting jump performances and EMS+P training increases jump, speed and agility performances of elite volleyball players.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22476926&amp;dopt=Abstract">Effects of pre-exercise feeding on serum hormone concentrations and biomarkers of myostatin and ubiquitin proteasome pathway activity.</a></h2>
<p>Eur J Nutr. 2012 Apr 5;</p>
<p>Authors: Dalbo VJ, Roberts MD, Hassell S, Kerksick CM</p>
<p>Abstract: PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to examine the acute effects of pre-exercise ingestion of protein, carbohydrate, and a non-caloric placebo on serum concentrations of insulin and cortisol, and the intramuscular gene expression of myostatin- and ubiquitin proteasome pathway (UPP)-related genes following a bout of resistance exercise. METHODS: Ten untrained college-aged men participated in three resistance exercise sessions (3 × 10 at 80 % 1RM for bilateral hack squat, leg press, and leg extension) in a cross-over fashion, which were randomly preceded by protein, carbohydrate, or placebo ingestion 30 min prior to training. Pre-supplement/pre-exercise, 2 h and 6 h post-exercise muscle biopsies were obtained during each session and analyzed for mRNA fold changes in myostatin (MSTN), activin IIB, follistatin-like 3 (FSTL3), SMAD specific E3 ubiquitin protein ligase 1 (SMURF1), forkhead box O3, F-box protein 32 (FBXO32), and Muscle RING-finger protein-1, with beta-actin serving as the housekeeping gene. Gene expression of all genes was analyzed using real-time PCR. RESULTS: Acute feeding appeared to have no significant effect on myostatin or UPP biomarkers. However, resistance exercise resulted in a significant downregulation of MSTN and FBXO32 mRNA expression and a significant upregulation in FSTL3 and SMURF1 mRNA expression (p &lt; 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: An acute bout of resistance exercise results in acute post-exercise alterations in intramuscular mRNA expression of myostatin and UPP markers suggestive of skeletal muscle growth. However, carbohydrate and protein feeding surrounding resistance exercise appear to have little influence on the acute expression of these markers.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22474580&amp;dopt=Abstract">Resistance Training in Type II Diabetes Mellitus: Impact on Areas of Metabolic Dysfunction in Skeletal Muscle and Potential Impact on Bone.</a></h2>
<p>J Nutr Metab. 2012;2012:268197</p>
<p>Authors: Wood RJ, O&#8217;Neill EC</p>
<p>Abstract:The prevalence of Type II Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasing rapidly and will continue to be a major healthcare expenditure burden. As such, identification of effective lifestyle treatments is paramount. Skeletal muscle and bone display metabolic and functional disruption in T2DM. Skeletal muscle in T2DM is characterized by insulin resistance, impaired glycogen synthesis, impairments in mitochondria, and lipid accumulation. Bone quality in T2DM is decreased, potentially due to the effects of advanced glycation endproducts on collagen, impaired osteoblast activity, and lipid accumulation. Although exercise is widely recognized as an important component of treatment for T2DM, the focus has largely been on aerobic exercise. Emerging research suggests that resistance training (strength training) may impose potent and unique benefits in T2DM. The purpose of this review is to examine the role of resistance training in treating the dysfunction in skeletal muscle and the potential role for resistance training in treating the associated dysfunction in bone.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22473250&amp;dopt=Abstract">The effects of lifestyle interventions in dynapenic-obese postmenopausal women.</a></h2>
<p>Menopause. 2012 Apr 2;</p>
<p>Authors: Sénéchal M, Bouchard DR, Dionne IJ, Brochu M</p>
<p>Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of caloric restriction (CR) and resistance training (RT) on body composition, metabolic profile and physical capacity in dynapenic-obese postmenopausal women. METHODS: Thirty-eight dynapenic-obese postmenopausal (age, 62.6 ± 4.1 y) women were randomly assigned to one of four groups (1, CR; 2, RT; 3, CR + RT; and 4, control) for a 12-week intervention. The independent variables were body weight, fat mass, and lean body mass (using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry), waist circumference, fasting lipids and glucose, resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure, and physical capacity (6-min walk, chair stand, and one-leg stand tests). RESULTS: Body weight, fat mass, and waist circumference decreased similarly in the CR and CR + RT groups (all P ≤ 0.05). However, only changes in the CR + RT group were significantly different from the control group (all P ≤ 0.05). Total cholesterol, triglycerides, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure significantly decreased in the CR group (all P ≤ 0.05); whereas total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and systolic blood pressure decreased in the CR + RT group (P ≤ 0.05). Physical capacity improved significantly in the RT and CR + RT groups (all P ≤ 0.05), with significant greater improvements in the RT group (P ≤ 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that CR with or without RT is effective in improving metabolic profile, whereas RT is effective in improving physical capacity. The combination of RT and CR may be particularly relevant in maximizing improvements in physical capacity in dynapenic-obese postmenopausal women.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22248804&amp;dopt=Abstract">The effects of quadriceps strengthening on pain, function, and patellofemoral joint contact area in persons with patellofemoral pain.</a></h2>
<p>Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Feb;91(2):98-106</p>
<p>Authors: Chiu JK, Wong YM, Yung PS, Ng GY</p>
<p>Abstract: OBJECTIVE: Patellar malalignment is a major cause of patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS), but the relationship between clinical symptoms and changes in patellar position and knee muscle strength has not been confirmed. This study examined the effect of weight training on hip and knee muscle strength, patellofemoral joint contact area, and patellar tilt on subjects with and without PFPS, hoping to develop an optimal rehabilitation protocol for subjects with PFPS.<br />
DESIGN: The study uses a prospective independent group comparison. Fifteen subjects with and without PFPS were assessed for knee strength, patellofemoral joint contact area, and patellar tilt angle using magnetic resonance imaging. The subjects with PFPS were also examined and given a numeric pain rating score and a Kujala patellofemoral score. The subjects performed lower-limb weight training 3 times/wk for 8 wks, and the outcomes were assessed both before and after training.<br />
RESULTS: Subjects with PFPS have increased their patellofemoral joint contact area after weight training (P &lt; 0.001). No statistical significant change was found on the patellar tilt angle. The isometric and isokinetic knee strength in subjects with and without PFPS have increased after weight training (P value increased from 0.007 to 0.05). Both numeric pain rating and Kujala patellofemoral score in the PFPS group improved after training (P &lt; 0.001).<br />
CONCLUSIONS: Weight-training exercise increased knee muscle strength and the patellofemoral joint contact area, which could reduce mechanical stress in the joint, improving pain and function in subjects with PFPS.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21941011&amp;dopt=Abstract">Resistance exercise inter-set cooling strategy: effect on performance and muscle damage.</a></h2>
<p>Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2011 Dec;6(4):580-4</p>
<p>Authors: Galoza P, Sampaio-Jorge F, Machado M, Fonseca R, Silva PA</p>
<p>Abstract:PURPOSE: To compare the effect of inter-set cooling and no cooling during resistance exercise (RE) on the total repetitions and select muscle damage biomarker responses.<br />
METHODS: Sixteen healthy men volunteered to participate in this study and were randomly assigned to Cooling (n = <img src='http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif' alt='8)' class='wp-smiley' /> or Control (n = <img src='http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_cool.gif' alt='8)' class='wp-smiley' /> groups. They performed a RE protocol consisting of four sets of biceps curl at 80% of 1RM. The cooling group received the application of wet bags of ice during each interest rest interval (Cooling), while the Control realized the same protocol without ice application. Exercise was performed to voluntary fatigue and the numbers of repetitions per set were recorded. Subjects provided blood samples before and at 24, 48, and 72 h following RE to evaluate serum CK activity and myoglobin concentration.<br />
RESULTS: The Cooling group produced a greater number of repetitions (approx. 21%) than did the Control, but there were no differences in serum CK activity and myoglobin responses between the groups.<br />
CONCLUSION: Incorporating inter-set external cooling augments the number of repetitions per set during RE without inducing an additional muscle damage biomarker response.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=21934171&amp;dopt=Abstract">The effect of cluster loading on force, velocity, and power during ballistic jump squat training.</a></h2>
<p>Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2011 Dec;6(4):455-68</p>
<p>Authors: Hansen KT, Cronin JB, Newton MJ</p>
<p>Abstract: PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of set structure, in terms of repetition work:rest ratios on force, velocity, and power during jump squat training.<br />
METHODS: Twenty professional and semiprofessional rugby players performed training sessions comprising four sets of 6 repetitions of a jump squat using four different set configurations. The first involved a traditional configuration (TR) of 4 × 6 repetitions with 3 min of rest between sets, the second (C1) 4 × 6 × singles (1 repetition) with 12 s of rest between repetitions, the third (C2) 4 × 3 × doubles (2 repetitions) with 30 s of rest between pairs, and the third (C3) 4 × 2 × triples (3 repetitions) with 60 s of rest between triples. A spreadsheet for the analysis of controlled trials that calculated the P-value, and percent difference and Cohen&#8217;s effect size from log-transformed data was used to investigate differences in repetition force, velocity, and power profiles among configurations.<br />
RESULTS: Peak power was significantly lower (P &lt; .05) for the TR condition when compared with C1 and C3 for repetition 4, and all cluster configurations for repetitions 5 and 6. Peak velocity was significantly lower (P &lt; .05) for the TR condition compared with C3 at repetition 4, significantly lower compared with C2 and C3 at repetition 5, and significantly lower compared with all cluster conditions for repetition 6.<br />
CONCLUSIONS: Providing inter-repetition rest during a traditional set of six repetitions can attenuate decreases in power and velocity of movement through the set</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22488276&amp;dopt=Abstract">A methodologic approach for normalizing angular work and velocity during isotonic and isokinetic eccentric training.</a></h2>
<p>J Athl Train. 2012;47(2):125-9</p>
<p>Authors: Guilhem G, Cornu C, Guével A</p>
<p>Abstract: CONTEXT: Resistance exercise training commonly is performed against a constant external load (isotonic) or at a constant velocity (isokinetic). Researchers comparing the effectiveness of isotonic and isokinetic resistance-training protocols need to equalize the mechanical stimulus (work and velocity) applied.<br />
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether the standardization protocol could be adjusted and applied to an eccentric training program.<br />
DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study.<br />
SETTING: Controlled research laboratory. Patients or Other Participants: Twenty-one sport science male students (age = 20.6 ± 1.5 years, height = 178.0 ± 4.0 cm, mass = 74.5 ± 9.1 kg). Intervention(s): Participants performed 9 weeks of isotonic (n = 11) or isokinetic (n = 10) eccentric training of knee extensors that was designed so they would perform the same amount of angular work at the same mean angular velocity. Main Outcome Measure(s): Angular work and angular velocity.<br />
RESULTS: The isotonic and isokinetic groups performed the same total amount of work (-185.2 ± 6.5 kJ and -184.4 ± 8.6 kJ, respectively) at the same angular velocity (21 ± 1°/s and 22°/s, respectively) with the same number of repetitions (8.0 and 8.0, respectively). Bland-Altman analysis showed that work (bias = 2.4%) and angular velocity (bias = 0.2%) were equalized over 9 weeks between the modes of training.<br />
CONCLUSIONS: The procedure developed allows angular work and velocity to be standardized over 9 weeks of isotonic and isokinetic eccentric training of the knee extensors. This method could be useful in future studies in which researchers compare neuromuscular adaptations induced by each type of training mode with respect to rehabilitating patients after musculoskeletal injury.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22487152&amp;dopt=Abstract">Comparison of low-intensity blood flow-restricted training-induced muscular hypertrophy in eumenorrheic women in the follicular phase and luteal phase and age-matched men.</a></h2>
<p>Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2012 May;32(3):185-91</p>
<p>Authors: Sakamaki M, Yasuda T, Abe T</p>
<p>Abstract: The purpose of this study was to compare the muscle hypertrophic response in women during both the follicular (FP) and the luteal phase (LP) of their menstrual cycles following short-term, low-intensity resistance training combined with blood flow restriction (BFR). Eight eumenorrheic women and five men, all previously untrained, performed unilateral low-intensity (30% of 1 repetition maximum) dumbbell curl training with BFR once a day for 6 days. The opposite arm served as an untrained control. This 6-day training programme was conducted during both menstrual cycle phases: the early FP and the mid LP. MRI-measured biceps muscle volume (MV) and isometric elbow flexion strength were measured in both arms before and 2 days after the final training bout. Significantly (P0.05) with the percentage change in MV between the LP and FP. There was no change in MV in the control arm for both cycle phases. Following training, isometric strength increased (P<strong id="internal-source-marker_0.25639509013853967"><br />
</strong></p>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/httpwww-lift-heavy-comgeeky-friday-201210/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#9 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-2012/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=geeky-friday-2012</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-2012/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2012 11:08:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[anabolic steroids]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[essential tremor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fitness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[muscle onset]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rugby]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strength]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[training]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[whey protein]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey guys, Hope you are ready for another edition of Geeky Friday. This week&#8217;s has been pretty quiet research-wise, maybe the publishers are feeling a bit lazy with the Easter coming up. Anyway, here&#8217;s some of the interesting stuff that has been dropping in to my mail inbox and RSS reader this week, including new science on training, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/stark-kanin.jpg"><img class="size-medium wp-image-864 aligncenter" title="stark kanin" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/stark-kanin-300x264.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="264" /></a></p>
<p>Hey guys,</p>
<p>Hope you are ready for another edition of Geeky Friday. This week&#8217;s has been pretty quiet research-wise, maybe the publishers are feeling a bit lazy with the Easter coming up. Anyway, here&#8217;s some of the interesting stuff that has been dropping in to my mail inbox and RSS reader this week, including new science on training, whey protein, anabolic steroids, essential tremor and more.  Hope you learn something new!</p>
<p><em>Make sure you share this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the  massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on<a href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a>,<a href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a> and<a href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly,  feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p><strong>Have an awesome Easter everybody!</strong></p>
<p>In strength,</p>
<p><strong>Bojan</strong></p>
<p>PS. Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22461463&amp;dopt=Abstract">Effects of two contrast training programs on jump performance in rugby union players during a competition phase.</a></h2>
<p>Int J Sports Physiol Perform. 2012 Mar;7(1):68-75<br />
Authors: Argus CK, Gill ND, Keogh J WL, McGuigan MR, Hopkins WG</p>
<p>Abstract:PURPOSE: There is little literature comparing contrast training programs typically performed by team-sport athletes within a competitive phase. We compared the effects of two contrast training programs on a range of measures in high-level rugby union players during the competition season.<br />
METHODS: THE programs consisted of a higher volume-load (strength-power) or lower volume-load (speed-power) resistance training; each included a tapering of loading (higher force early in the week, higher velocity later in the week) and was performed twice a week for 4 wk. Eighteen players were assessed for peak power during a bodyweight countermovement jump (BWCMJ), bodyweight squat jump (BWSJ), 50 kg countermovement jump (50CMJ), 50 kg squat jump (50SJ), broad jump (BJ), and reactive strength index (RSI; jump height divided by contact time during a depth jump). Players were then randomized to either training group and were reassessed following the intervention. Inferences were based on uncertainty in outcomes relative to thresholds for standardized changes.<br />
RESULTS: There were small between-group differences in favor of strength-power training for mean changes in the 50CMJ (8%; 90% confidence limits, ±8%), 50SJ (8%; ±10%), and BJ (2%; ±3%). Differences between groups for BWCMJ, BWSJ, and reactive strength index were unclear. For most measures there were smaller individual differences in changes with strength-power training.<br />
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that high-level rugby union athletes should be exposed to higher volume-load contrast training which includes one heavy lifting session each week for larger and more uniform adaptation to occur in explosive power throughout a competitive phase of the season.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22460474&amp;dopt=Abstract">Whey Protein does not Enhance the Adaptations to Elbow Flexor Resistance Training.</a></h2>
<p>Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2012 Mar 28;</p>
<p>Authors: Erskine RM, Fletcher G, Hanson B, Folland JP</p>
<p>Abstract: PURPOSE: It is unclear whether protein supplementation augments the gains in muscle strength and size observed following resistance training (RT), as limitations to previous studies include small cohorts, imprecise measures of muscle size and strength, and no control of prior exercise or habitual protein intake (HPI). We aimed to determine whether whey protein supplementation affected RT-induced changes in elbow flexor muscle strength and size. METHODS: We pair-matched 33 previously untrained, healthy young men for their HPI and strength response to 3-wk RT without nutritional supplementation (followed by 6-wk no training), and then randomly assigned them to protein (PRO; n = 17) or placebo (PLA; n = 16) groups. Participants subsequently performed elbow flexor RT 3 d/wk for 12-wk and consumed PRO or PLA immediately before and after each training session. We assessed elbow flexor muscle strength [unilateral 1-RM and isometric maximum voluntary force (MVF)] and size [total volume and maximum anatomical cross-sectional area (ACSAmax) determined with MRI] before and after the 12-wk RT. RESULTS: PRO and PLA demonstrated similar increases in muscle volume (PRO, 17.0 ± 7.1% vs. PLA, 14.9 ± 4.6%; P = 0.32), ACSAmax (PRO, 16.2 ± 7.1% vs. PLA, 15.6 ± 4.4%; P = 0.80), 1-RM (PRO, 41.8 ± 21.2% vs. PLA, 41.4 ± 19.9%; P = 0.97) and MVF (PRO, 12.0 ± 9.9% vs. PLA, 14.5 ± 8.3%; P = 0.43). CONCLUSION: In the context of this study, protein supplementation did not augment elbow flexor muscle strength and size changes that occurred after 12-wk RT.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22459398&amp;dopt=Abstract">Anabolic androgenic steroid use is associated with ventricular dysfunction on cardiac MRI in strength trained athletes.</a></h2>
<p>Int J Cardiol. 2012 Mar 27;<br />
Authors: Luijkx T, Velthuis BK, Backx FJ, Buckens CF, Prakken NH, Rienks R, Mali WP, Cramer MJ</p>
<p>Abstract:BACKGROUND: Uncertainty remains about possible cardiac adaptation to resistance training. Androgenic anabolic steroids (AAS) use plays a potential role and may have adverse cardiovascular effects. OBJECTIVE: To elucidate the effect of resistance training and of AAS-use on cardiac dimensions and function. PARTICIPANTS: Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) were performed in 156 male subjects aged 18-40years: 52 non-athletes (maximum of 3exercise hours/week), 52 strength-endurance (high dynamic-high static, HD-HS) athletes and 52 strength (low dynamic-high static, LD-HS) trained athletes (athletes ≥6exercise hours/week). 28 LD-HS athletes denied and 24 admitted to AAS use for an average duration of 5years (range 3months-20years). RESULTS: No significant differences were found between non-athletes and non-AAS-using LD-HS athletes. AAS-using LD-HS athletes had significantly larger LV and RV volumes and LV wall mass than non-AAS-using LD-HS athletes, but lower than HD-HS athletes. In comparison to all other groups AAS-using LD-HS athletes showed lower ejection fractions of both ventricles (LV/RV EF 51/48% versus 55-57/51-52%) and lower E/A ratios (LV/RV 1.5/1.2 versus 1.9-2.0/1.4-1.5) as an indirect measure of diastolic function. Linear regression models demonstrated a significant effect of AAS-use on LV EDV, LV EDM, systolic function and mitral valve E/A ratio (all ANOVA-tests p</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22446995&amp;dopt=Abstract">Resistance training can improve fine manual dexterity in Essential Tremor patients: a preliminary study.</a></h2>
<p>Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Mar 23;</p>
<p>Authors: Sequeira G, Keogh JW, Kavanagh JJ</p>
<p>Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine if a short-term resistance training (RT) program of the upper limb can improve strength, fine manual dexterity, and quality of life in individuals with Essential Tremor (ET). DESIGN: Single group, dual pretest-posttest intervention study. SETTING: General community. PARTICIPANTS: Six participants (age: 74 ± 7 years) clinically diagnosed as having ET (years diagnosed: 19 ± 7 years) were recruited into the study. INTERVENTION: A 6-week RT program involving unilateral dumbbell bicep curls, wrist flexion and wrist extension exercises twice a week. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Upper limb strength determined from 5 repetition maximum (5RM); Fine manual dexterity determined from the Purdue Pegboard Test (PPT) for the hand of most affected limb, the hand of the least affected limb, both hands, and a bilateral assembly task; Quality of life determined from the Short Form 36 (SF-36) and the ET specific Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST). RESULTS: The RT program resulted in significant increases in four of the six upper limb strength measures. Significant improvements in the PPT were observed for the single hand components of this test. PPT performance improved immediately following RT when using the most affected limb, but these changes took longer to be observed for the least affected limb. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, fine manual dexterity improved in ET patients following a simple RT program. The findings of this preliminary study provide clear evidence that RT is worthy of further investigation as a therapy for improving functionality in ET patients.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22446667&amp;dopt=Abstract">Maximal strength on different resistance training rowing exercises predicts start phase performance in elite kayakers.</a></h2>
<p>J Strength Cond Res. 2012 Apr;26(4):941-6</p>
<p>Authors: Ualí I, Herrero AJ, Garatachea N, Marín PJ, Alvear-Ordenes I, García-López D</p>
<p>Abstract: This study aimed to examine the relationship existing between maximum strength values in 2 common resistance training row exercises (bilateral bench pull [BBP] and one-arm cable row [OACR]) and short sprint performance in elite kayakers. Ten junior kayakers (5 women and 5 men) were tested on different days for 1 repetition maximum (1RM) and maximal voluntary isometric contraction in both exercises. Moreover, a 12-m sprint kayak was performed in a dew pond to record split times (2, 5, and 10 m), peak velocity, distance completed considering the first 8 strokes, and mean acceleration induced by right blade and left blade strokes. No differences (p &gt; 0.05) were observed when right and left arms were compared in sprint testing or strength testing variables. Maximal strength values in BBP and OACR were significantly correlated with short sprint performance variables, showing the bilateral exercise with slightly stronger correlation coefficients than the unilateral seated row. Moreover, the relationship between strength testing and sprint testing variables is stronger when maximal force is measured through a dynamic approach (1RM) in comparison with an isometric approach. In conclusion, maximal strength in BBP and OACR is a good predictor of the start phase performance in elite sprint kayakers, mainly the 1RM value in BBP.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22085715&amp;dopt=Abstract">Muscle onset can be improved by therapeutic exercise: a systematic review.</a></h2>
<p><span style="font-weight: 800;"><br />
<strong>Phys Ther Sport. 2011 Nov;12(4):199-209</strong></span></p>
<p>Authors: Crow J, Pizzari T, Buttifant D</p>
<p>Abstract:OBJECTIVES: To determine whether therapeutic exercise can improve the timing of muscle onset following musculoskeletal pathology, and examine what exercise prescription parameters are being used to achieve these effects.<br />
PARTICIPANTS: People with a musculoskeletal pathology.<br />
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Muscle onset timing as measured by electromyography.<br />
RESULTS: Sixteen investigations were identified containing 19 therapeutic exercise groups. Three exercise modes were identified including: isolated muscle training, instability training, and general strength training. Isolated muscle training is consistently shown to have a positive effect on the muscle onset timing of transversus abdominus in people with low back pain. There is some evidence from cohort studies that instability training may change muscle onset timing in people with functional ankle instability, however controlled trials suggest that no effect is present. General strength training shows no effect on muscle onset timing in people with low back or neck pain, although one cohort study suggests that a positive effect on gluteus maximus may be present in people with low back pain.<br />
CONCLUSION: Therapeutic exercise training is likely to improve muscle onset timing. Additionally, isolated muscle training appears to be the best exercise mode to use to achieve these effects.</p>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-2012/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Geeky Fridays Vol#8 – 2012</title>
		<link>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-20128/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=geeky-friday-20128</link>
		<comments>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-20128/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2012 01:00:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bojan.K</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breakfast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[creatine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diabetes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[obesity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Resistance training]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lift-heavy.com/?p=852</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey friends! Time for another smoking hot edition of Geeky Friday! No long intro this week since I&#8217;m celebrating my birthday and will be chillaxing with friends and family. On this week&#8217;s agenda we have some hot new research on abdominal muscles in weightlifters, exercise order, creatine supplementation, obesity and much more. Don&#8217;t let me [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/nerd_alert-13809.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-855" title="nerd_alert-13809" src="http://www.lift-heavy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/nerd_alert-13809-300x300.gif" alt="" width="300" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>Hey friends! Time for another smoking hot edition of Geeky Friday! No long intro this week since I&#8217;m celebrating my birthday and will be chillaxing with friends and family. On this week&#8217;s agenda we have some hot new research on abdominal muscles in weightlifters, exercise order, creatine supplementation, obesity and much more. Don&#8217;t let me hold you back. Get your geek on &#8211; like right now.</p>
<p><em>Make sure you share this article with your friends and followers. We need to spread the science and integrate it with the  massive amounts of personal experience that is already out there-  so we can make the best and most effective programs for ourselves and our clients. Also, hit me up on<a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://facebook.com']);" href="http://facebook.com/bkostevski"> Facebook</a>,<a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://twitter.com']);" href="http://twitter.com/bojankostevski">Twitter</a> and<a onclick="javascript:_gaq.push(['_trackEvent','outbound-article','http://gplus.to']);" href="http://gplus.to/bojankostevski"> Google+.</a> Interacting with like-minded on day to day basis is one of the main reasons I run this site. Lastly,  feel free to leave any questions or feedback in the comments below, I look much forward to hearing from you.</em></p>
<p><strong>I wish you all an awesome weekend including resting, socializing and lifting heavy stuff. </strong></p>
<p>In strength,</p>
<p><strong>Bojan</strong></p>
<p>PS. Want more? You can find the old Geeky Friday posts under the<strong> <a href="http://www.lift-heavy.com/category/research/">RESEARCH</a></strong> category!</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22085710&amp;dopt=Abstract">Comparison of lateral abdominal muscle thickness between weightlifters and matched controls.</a></h2>
<p>Phys Ther Sport. 2011 Nov;12(4):171-4</p>
<p>Authors: Sitilertpisan P, Pirunsan U, Puangmali A, Ratanapinunchai J, Kiatwattanacharoen S, Neamin H, Laskin JJ</p>
<p>Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To compare lateral abdominal muscle thickness between weightlifters and matched controls.<br />
DESIGN: A case control study design.<br />
SETTING: University laboratory.<br />
SUBJECTS: 16 female Thai national weightlifters and 16 matched controls participated in this study.<br />
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ultrasound imaging with a 12-MHz linear array was used to measure the resting thickness of transversus abdominis (TrA), internal oblique (IO) and total thickness (Total) of lateral abdominal muscle (LAM) on the right side of abdominal wall. The absolute muscle thickness and the relative contribution of each muscle to the total thickness were determined.<br />
RESULTS: Weightlifters had significantly thicker absolute TrA and IO muscles than matched controls (p &lt; 0.01). Further, the relative thickness of the IO was significantly greater in weightlifters than matched controls (p &lt; 0.05).<br />
CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study suggest that routine Olympic style weight training among female weightlifters appears to result in preferential hypertrophy or adaptation of the IO muscle.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22178632&amp;dopt=Abstract">Strength prior to endurance intra-session exercise sequence optimizes neuromuscular and cardiovascular gains in elderly men.</a></h2>
<p>Exp Gerontol. 2012 Feb;47(2):164-9</p>
<p dir="ltr">Authors: Cadore EL, Izquierdo M, Alberton CL, Pinto RS, Conceição M, Cunha G, Radaelli R, Bottaro M, Trindade GT, Kruel LF</p>
<p dir="ltr">Abstract:This study investigated the effects of different intra-session exercise sequences in the cardiovascular and neuromuscular adaptations induced by concurrent training in elderly. Twenty-six healthy elderly men (64.7±4.1years), were randomly placed into two concurrent training groups: strength training prior to (SE, n=13) or after (ES, n=13) endurance training. Subjects trained strength and endurance training 3 times per week performing both exercise types in the same training session. The peak oxygen uptake (VO(2peak)), maximum aerobic workload (W(máx)), absolute (VT(1) and VT(2)) and relative (VT(1)% and VT(2)%) ventilatory thresholds, as well as workloads at VT(1) and VT(2) (W(VT1) and W(VT2)) were evaluated during a maximal incremental test on a cycle ergometer before and after the training. In addition, muscle quality (MQ) was evaluated by the quotient between maximal dynamic strength (one repetition maximum test) of the knee extensors and the quadriceps femoris muscle thickness determined by ultrasonography. There were no modifications after training in the VT(1), VT(2), VT(1)%, and VT(2)%. There was significant increase in the W(VT1) only in SE (P</p>
<h2><a id="internal-source-marker_0.8023921746065376" href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22131203">Ergolytic/ergogenic effects of creatine on aerobic power.</a></h2>
<p>Int J Sports Med. 2011 Dec;32(12):975-81. Epub 2011 Nov 30.</p>
<p>Authors: Smith AE, Fukuda DH, Ryan ED, Kendall KL, Cramer JT, Stout J.<br />
Source</p>
<p>Abstract: This study evaluated the effects of creatine (Cr) loading and sex differences on aerobic running performance. 27 men (mean±SD; age: 22.2±3.1 years, ht: 179.5±8.7 cm, wt: 78.0±9.8 kg) and 28 women (age: 21.2±2.1 years, ht: 166.0±5.8 cm, wt: 63.4±8.9 kg) were randomly assigned to either creatine (Cr, di-creatine citrate; n=27) or a placebo (PL; n=28) group, ingesting 1 packet 4 times daily (total of 20 g/day) for 5 days. Aerobic power (maximal oxygen consumption: VO2max) was assessed before and after supplementation using open circuit spirometry (Parvo-Medics) during graded exercise tests on a treadmill. 4 high-speed runs to exhaustion were conducted at 110, 105, 100, and 90% of peak velocity to determine critical velocity (CV). Distances achieved were plotted over times-to-exhaustion and linear regression was used to determine the slopes (critical velocity, CV) assessing aerobic performance. The results indicated that Cr loading did not positively or negatively influence VO2max, CV, time to exhaustion or body mass (p&gt;0.05). These results suggest Cr supplementation may be used in aerobic running activities without detriments to performance.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22434783&amp;dopt=Abstract">Twice-weekly, in-school jumping improves lean mass, particularly in adolescent boys.</a></h2>
<p>Pediatr Obes. 2012 Feb 10;</p>
<p>Authors: Weeks BK, Beck BR</p>
<p>Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a twice-weekly, school-based, 10-min jumping regime on muscle and fat tissue in healthy adolescent boys and girls. METHODS: We replaced regular warm-up activities with jumping in physical education (PE) classes of early high school students for 8 months to observe the effect on muscle and fat tissue. A total of 99 adolescents (46 boys, 53 girls; 13.8 ± 0.4 years) volunteered to participate. Intervention group subjects performed 10 min of varied jumping activity, while control subjects performed a regular PE warm-up. Biometrics, Tanner staging, age of peak height velocity (PHV), vertical jump, whole body lean tissue and fat mass (dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry-derived) were measured at baseline and follow-up. Physical activity was determined by questionnaire. RESULTS: There were no differences in any measured variable between control and intervention groups at baseline. Boys had a significantly older age of PHV than girls (p = 0.02). No group differences were detected for 8-month change in height, weight or maturity measures for the combined sample; however, at 8 months, jumpers had accrued greater lean tissue mass than controls (p = 0.002). Sex-specific analysis revealed that intervention group boys had gained more lean tissue mass than controls (p = 0.016) and experienced significant fat loss (p = 0.010) than controls, an effect that was not observed in the girls. CONCLUSION: Regular, short-duration, jumping activity during adolescence increased lean tissue mass and boys additionally lost fat mass. Sex-specific and/or maturation-specific factors may explain the disparity in effect.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22440321&amp;dopt=Abstract">The aging musculoskeletal system and obesity-related considerations with exercise.</a></h2>
<p>Ageing Res Rev. 2012 Mar 15;</p>
<p>Authors: Vincent HK, Raiser SN, Vincent KR</p>
<p>Abstract:Advancing age and adiposity contribute to musculoskeletal degenerative diseases and the development of sarcopenic obesity. The etiology of muscle loss is multifactorial, and includes inflammation, oxidative stress and hormonal changes, and is worsened by activity avoidance due to fear of pain. The risk for mobility disability and functional impairment rises with severity of obesity in the older adult. Performance measures of walking distance, walking speed, chair rise, stair climb, body transfers and ability to navigate obstacles on a course are adversely affected in this population, and this reflects decline in daily physical functioning. Exercise training is an ideal intervention to counteract the effects of aging and obesity. The 18 randomized controlled trials of exercise studies with or without diet components reviewed here indicate that 3-18 month programs that included aerobic and strengthening exercise (2-3 days per week) with caloric restriction (typically 750kcal deficit/day), induced the greatest change in functional performance measures compared with exercise or diet alone. Importantly, resistance exercise attenuates muscle mass loss with the interventions. These interventions can also combat factors that invoke sarcopenia, including inflammation, oxidative stress and insulin resistance. Therefore, regular multimodal exercise coupled with diet appears to be very effective for counteracting sarocpenic obesity and improving mobility and function in the older, obese adult.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22434740&amp;dopt=Abstract">Breakfast consumption and meal frequency interaction with childhood obesity.</a></h2>
<p>Pediatr Obes. 2012 Feb;7(1):65-72</p>
<p>Authors: Antonogeorgos G, Panagiotakos DB, Papadimitriou A, Priftis KN, Anthracopoulos M, Nicolaidou P</p>
<p>Abstract:OBJECTIVES: Increased meal frequency and daily breakfast consumption have been inversely associated with childhood obesity. The purpose of the study was to examine the possible interaction effect between meal frequency and breakfast consumption on childhood obesity.<br />
METHODS: Seven hundred children (323 boys) aged 10-12 years were enrolled in this cross-sectional study. Several lifestyle, dietary and physical activity characteristics were recorded with food frequency and physical activity questionnaires. Body height and weight were measured and body mass index was calculated in order to classify children as overweight or obese (International Obesity Task Force classification). Multiple logistic regression analysis was used in order to evaluate the interaction between daily breakfast intake and more than three meals per day consumption with overweight or obesity. REUSLTS: Of the children, 27.6% and 9.0% were overweight and obese, respectively. Moreover, 60.2% consumed three or more meals per day and 62.7% consumed breakfast in a regular daily basis. Children who consumed more than three meals per day and also consumed breakfast daily, were two times less likely to be overweight or obese (adjusted odds ratio: 0.49, 95% confidence interval: 0.27-0.88).<br />
CONCLUSION: A combined higher meal frequency and daily breakfast consumption dietary pattern may prevent overweight and obesity in children.</p>
<h2 dir="ltr"><a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?tmpl=NoSidebarfile&amp;db=PubMed&amp;cmd=Retrieve&amp;list_uids=22433267&amp;dopt=Abstract">The Effect of Training at a Specific Time-of-Day on the Diurnal Variations of Short-Term Exercise Performances in 10- to 11-Year-Old Boys.</a></h2>
<p>Pediatr Exerc Sci. 2012 Feb;24(1):84-99</p>
<p>Authors: Souissi H, Chtourou H, Chaouachi A, Dogui M, Chamari K, Souissi N, Amri M</p>
<p>Abstract:The aim of this study was to assess the effect of time-of-day-specific training on the diurnal variations of short-term performances in boys. Twenty-four boys were randomized into a morning-training-group (07:00-08:00h; MTG), an evening-training-group (17:00-18:00h; ETG) and a control-group (CG). They performed four tests of strength and power (unilateral isometric maximal voluntary contraction of the knee extensor muscles, Squat-Jump, Counter-Movement-Jump and Wingate tests) at 07:00 and 17:00h just before (T0) and after 6 weeks of resistance training (T1). In T0, the results revealed that short-term performances improved and oral temperature increased significantly from morning to afternoon (amplitudes between 2.36 and 17.5% for both oral temperature and performances) for all subjects. In T1, the diurnal variations of performances were blunted in the MTG and persisted in the ETG and CG. Moreover, the training program increase muscle strength and power especially after training in the morning hours and the magnitude of gains was greater at the time-of-day-specific training than at other times. In conclusion, these results suggest that time-of-day-specific training increases the child&#8217;s anaerobic performances specifically at this time-of-day. Moreover, the improvement of these performances was greater after morning than evening training.</p>
<p style='text-align:left'>&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;-</br><i>&copy; 2012, <i><a rel="author" href="https://profiles.google.com/102886422975319751138"><b>Dr.Bojan Kostevski</b></a></i>. <i>Lift-Heavy.com is a division of <a href="http://www.flawlessfitnessmedia.com" target="_blank">Flawless Fitness Media</a> &#8211; All Rights Reserved &#8211; No part of this post is to be republished without author consent under any forms of media (including print, internet, video or audio transcription). Doing so is a violation against copyright law. All images are copyright of their respective owners.</i> </i></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.lift-heavy.com/geeky-friday-20128/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Served from: www.lift-heavy.com @ 2012-05-18 16:54:37 by W3 Total Cache -->
