#maehlum

[loveaffirmations]

I am worthy of all the love, abundance, and success that the Universe has to offer.

I let go of limiting beliefs that tell me otherwise and embrace my true worth.

#positive energy #manifestation #shrooms #the law of attraction #detressmonday #aint got nothing #machi gyrau #lush star bright #ace and tate #maehlum

[mykingdommusic]

"My Ghost" will be the title of CREST OF DARKNESS new album

"I have probably never released a more personal album than "My Ghost". This is how CREST OF DARKNESS founder Ingar Amlien defines "My Ghost", the new full-length album from the Norwegian Black Metal band, set for release on the next autumn on My Kingdom Music and anticipated in June by a single released in an exclusive 7" EP format. "My Ghost" is the result of two years worth of blood, sweat and tears, that began with Ingar working alone to mould his very personal thoughts and beliefs into musical ideas that the band can then develop together, each contributing their own ideas to the process, before entering the MLP Studios with Nils H. Maehlum at the helm. The result is an extremely personal journey that defines the very essence of CREST OF DARKNESS.

Here are Ingar's thoughts about the new music they will be releasing: "After what felt to us like an eternity of waiting, the time has finally come for us to be able to present you with new music. Since 1996 I have nurtured CREST OF DARKNESS in my heart, and in all that time I have probably never released a more personal album than "My Ghost", which will appear in the Autumn of 2024. Before that, however, you can get a taste of what to expect from "My Ghost", in the form of a single which will be released in June, even before details of the album itself are announced. I can, however, reveal that "My Ghost" is a concept album, one in which you are invited to join me on what I would call an "initiation journey" into the CREST OF DARKNESS Universe. An invitation into my own dark universe where there is only one ruler... one God... ME!!".

Over the coming days we'll reveal more details about the album and the upcoming single. For the moment just imagine finding yourself in front of one of the most incredible, mature and deeply personal albums that CREST OF DARKNESS has ever released.

#mykingdommusic #crestofdarkness #blackmetal #evilmetal #NorwegianMetal #norway #norse #mayhem #satyricon #myghost #satanicmetal #satan #satanicart #vampyr #darkart #satanic #hailsatan #vampyre #darkness #SvartMetal

[guguvumipin]

Linkwitz marathon 2 manual

  LINKWITZ MARATHON 2 MANUAL >> DOWNLOAD LINK vk.cc/c7jKeU

  LINKWITZ MARATHON 2 MANUAL >> READ ONLINE bit.do/fSmfG

            LinkWitz Marathon 2 - Cuffie Bluetooth Senza Fili Pieghevoli con Stereo HiFi e M. marathon II N. COLOCACIÓNY REGLAJE DE LOS FINALES DE CARRERA MAGNÉTICOS Los finales de carrera [Fig. FUNCIONAMENTO MANUAL Un cómodo desbloqueo manual de llave hace que pueda marathon II N. Conexión fotocélula emisor / receptor con test. Hi all, One of my COVID projects was to build the Linkwitz LX521.4 to replace my first LXmini. But once I switched over to balanced connectors using the Phoenix pigtails supplied with the MiniDSP, the noise went away entirely. I've got two separate Nord amps, one a year old, one new, and the older Workshop, repair and service manuals, wiring diagrams, fault codes PDF - more than 1000+ truck manuals are available for free download! Zoomlion Mobile Cranes Service Manuals PDF, spare parts catalog, fault codes and wiring diagrams. The Linkwitz-Riley filter featured here has (almost) perfect phase-coherency, with no peaks or dips at the crossover frequency. The design is adaptable to 2-way or 3-way operation, and all formulas are provided below (or use the ESP-LR component calculator program). Technische Daten zu LINKWITZ Marathon 2. Anschlüsse. Foren zu LINKWITZ Marathon 2. Kopfhörer allgemein. Microsoft Xbox. Bluetooth Kopfhörer Linkwitz Marathon2. 17 €. Harz, 06108 Halle. Kabellose Reichweite bis zu 10m. Marathon Kopfhörer [2. Generation], 2 Ohrpolster, USB Ladekabel, Bedienungsanleitung.

https://ranebosexov.tumblr.com/post/667137597030662144/r-statistics-tutorialhp-laserjet-4100-service, https://sunadanor.tumblr.com/post/667140934197280768/heavy-fire-shattered-spear-ps3, https://pirowoqowe.tumblr.com/post/667135830770548736/microcontroller-based-system-design-book-pdf, https://kihecuvelata.tumblr.com/post/667124878509572096/soldier-movie-kurt-russell, https://miwupivumi.tumblr.com/post/667131740568109056/bahr-maehlum-lesiones-deportivas-pdf.

[fisicol92]

Sweden’s Ebba Andersson picked up the third gold medal of her career, winning the women’s 5k freestyle Wednesday at the USANA FIS Junior Nordic World Championships on the Olympic trails at Soldier Hollow with a 13.8 second win over silver medalist Marte Maehlum Johansen of Norway. Russia’s Mariya Istomina took bronze. Anderson came into the event as the favorite, starting last and chasing Johansen the entire way. Course conditions were hard packed under bright skies with temperatures just below freezing.

Vladislav Vechkanov led a Russian podium sweep in the men’s 10k freestyle at the USANA FIS Junior Nordic World Championships Wednesday. He took a 7.9 second margin over teammate and silver medalist Egor Kazarinov with Yaroslav Rybochkin taking bronze.

#ebba andersson #marte maehlum johansen #mariya istomina #vladislav vechkanov #egor kazarinov #yaroslav rybochkin #cross country skiing #cross country ski

[watsonrodriquezie]

Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup

Last week, Craig Emmerich graced us with a great post on the oxidative priority of various dietary fuel sources, namely fats, carbohydrates, and protein.

If you haven’t had the chance to read through Craig’s post, definitely do. The visuals really drive home the point of fuel priority. Visuals appeal to me. They have a way of sticking with you, and there’s a power in recalling them when you’re making daily choices.

Today, I’m going through and answering some of the questions you folks had in the comment board.

I’m actually answering a great series of questions from Gerard.

I’ve seen this analysis before, and always had the question – can we really lump “carbohydrates” together like this?

No, we can’t. Craig gave a great overview, a useful 30,000 foot view that’s sufficient for most people who just want to eat and metabolize their fuel better, but there are differences between different carbohydrates. I know he’d say as much, and he may have time to weigh in here, too. If his schedule allows, I’ll include his response later today. But back to the differences in carbohydrates…. I’ll save fructose versus glucose for my answers to Gerard’s next questions. What about others?

Think of fiber. Fiber the monolith is already different from more digestible carbohydrates like glucose and fructose in that we can’t extract very much (or even any) caloric energy from it. But you can go even further and look at the individual metabolic fates of the different types of fiber.

Fermentable fibers like inulin and resistant starch are fermented into short chain fatty acids like butyrate and propionate. These provide important cell signaling and are worth about 2 calories per gram, give or take. Others forms of fiber are not fermented and provide colonic bulk but not calories.

Certain carbohydrates are treated differently in different people. Lactose tolerance allows people to digest lactose with lactase and use it for fuel. Lactose intolerance prevents people from digesting lactose, instead diverting it to gut bacteria to ferment and cause terrible digestive distress. FODMAP intolerance is similar. Those with FODMAP intolerance ferment carbs like sugar, lactose, and others in the gut, producing gas but not calories; those without it digest the carbs, producing useable energy.

Are fructose and glucose metabolized differently for this purpose?

There are definitely differences. For one, glucose stimulates insulin production, while fructose does not. But the differences may not be as stark as we often think.

When scientists attached isotopes to fructose, had healthy sedentary people eat it, then tracked the metabolic fate of the fructose molecules, they found:

50% ended up as glucose, converted by the liver to be used elsewhere in the body.

25% ended up as lactate, converted by the liver.

17% ended up as liver glycogen.

2-3% was converted to fat in the liver via de novo lipogenesis.

The rest was oxidized and expelled as CO2.

According to the study authors, this is quite similar to the metabolic fate of glucose. Even if you’re talking about de novo lipogenesis, often considered the sole province of fructose overfeeding, research shows that overfeeding with glucose also provokes the creation of new fat.

As far as burning/oxidizing of ingested glucose and fructose, there are differences. At rest, people tend to burn fructose faster than glucose. During exercise, people tend to oxidize glucose faster than fructose. However, when you give someone both fructose and glucose together, they burn them faster than either fuel source alone. In one study, subjects were either given 100 grams of fructose, glucose, or fructose+glucose. The fructose group burned through 43.8% of their dose, the glucose group burned through 48.1% of theirs, while the fructose+glucose group burned through 73.6% of their dose.

Is the storage capacity for energy from fructose and glucose equivalent (i.e., liver vs muscle glycogen)?

There’s actually a misconception about fructose and glycogen repletion. Here’s the story you may have heard: Fructose can only contribute to liver glycogen, while glucose only contributes to muscle glycogen.

It’s not quite accurate. I believed it for awhile, too, until I actually checked it out. It turns out that both fructose and glucose are able to contribute toward both liver and muscle glycogen. Fructose is about half as efficient as glucose at replenishing muscle glycogen, as it first must be converted into glucose in the liver before being sent out, but it will eventually get the job done.

One big difference is that there’s a lot more room in your muscles than in your liver. The average person can store about 300 grams of glycogen in their muscles but only 90 grams in their liver. Even if the metabolic fates are ultimately pretty similar in a vacuum, in the real world there’s simply less room for liver glycogen, and, thus, less room for fructose in the diet without overstepping the bounds and incurring metabolic dysfunction.

So, if you’re talking about an overweight, sedentary person walking around with full glycogen stores eating a hypercaloric diet, fructose will behave differently than glucose. In the healthy, lean, eucaloric, and active, whole foods-based fructose isn’t a big deal and may not have a drastically different metabolic effect compared to glucose.

At any rate, discussing isolated fructose and isolated glucose may not even be very relevant to real world results. You’re eating fruit, not quaffing cola. You’re enjoying a sweet potato, not a bag of Skittles smothered in agave nectar. You’re eating both glucose and fructose together in the context of a meal, of a whole food. Don’t get too bogged down in the effects of isolated nutrient-poor sugars unless you’re consuming them that way.

To what extent is fructose metabolized in a manner that is more similar to alcohol than carbohydrate?

Fructose is metabolized in the liver. Alcohol is metabolized in the liver.

Fructose gets taken up by the liver without insulin. Alcohol ends up in the liver without insulin rising.

But after that, according to Richard Feinman, the similarities stop. Alcohol is a toxin with known toxic metabolites. There may be some benefit to low level exposure to alcohol, but it remains a toxin. Fructose can be situationally toxic, as in the obese guy with glycogen-replete fatty liver and full-blown diabetes, but we are physiologically capable of handing normal amounts without producing toxic metabolites. Feinman considers it more of a rhetorical device than a statement of facts.

That’s it for today, folks. Thanks for reading and if you have any further questions on the topic, let me know down below and I’ll do my best to get to them.

Take care!

References:

Tappy L, Lê KA. Metabolic effects of fructose and the worldwide increase in obesity. Physiol Rev. 2010;90(1):23-46.

Sun SZ, Empie MW. Fructose metabolism in humans – what isotopic tracer studies tell us. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2012;9(1):89.

Blom PC, Høstmark AT, Vaage O, Kardel KR, Maehlum S. Effect of different post-exercise sugar diets on the rate of muscle glycogen synthesis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1987;19(5):491-6.

Mcdevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74(6):737-46.

Rosset R, Lecoultre V, Egli L, et al. Postexercise repletion of muscle energy stores with fructose or glucose in mixed meals. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017;105(3):609-617.

The post Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup appeared first on Mark's Daily Apple.

[milenasanchezmk]

Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup

Last week, Craig Emmerich graced us with a great post on the oxidative priority of various dietary fuel sources, namely fats, carbohydrates, and protein.

If you haven’t had the chance to read through Craig’s post, definitely do. The visuals really drive home the point of fuel priority. Visuals appeal to me. They have a way of sticking with you, and there’s a power in recalling them when you’re making daily choices.

Today, I’m going through and answering some of the questions you folks had in the comment board.

I’m actually answering a great series of questions from Gerard.

I’ve seen this analysis before, and always had the question – can we really lump “carbohydrates” together like this?

No, we can’t. Craig gave a great overview, a useful 30,000 foot view that’s sufficient for most people who just want to eat and metabolize their fuel better, but there are differences between different carbohydrates. I know he’d say as much, and he may have time to weigh in here, too. If his schedule allows, I’ll include his response later today. But back to the differences in carbohydrates…. I’ll save fructose versus glucose for my answers to Gerard’s next questions. What about others?

Think of fiber. Fiber the monolith is already different from more digestible carbohydrates like glucose and fructose in that we can’t extract very much (or even any) caloric energy from it. But you can go even further and look at the individual metabolic fates of the different types of fiber.

Fermentable fibers like inulin and resistant starch are fermented into short chain fatty acids like butyrate and propionate. These provide important cell signaling and are worth about 2 calories per gram, give or take. Others forms of fiber are not fermented and provide colonic bulk but not calories.

Certain carbohydrates are treated differently in different people. Lactose tolerance allows people to digest lactose with lactase and use it for fuel. Lactose intolerance prevents people from digesting lactose, instead diverting it to gut bacteria to ferment and cause terrible digestive distress. FODMAP intolerance is similar. Those with FODMAP intolerance ferment carbs like sugar, lactose, and others in the gut, producing gas but not calories; those without it digest the carbs, producing useable energy.

Are fructose and glucose metabolized differently for this purpose?

There are definitely differences. For one, glucose stimulates insulin production, while fructose does not. But the differences may not be as stark as we often think.

When scientists attached isotopes to fructose, had healthy sedentary people eat it, then tracked the metabolic fate of the fructose molecules, they found:

50% ended up as glucose, converted by the liver to be used elsewhere in the body.

25% ended up as lactate, converted by the liver.

17% ended up as liver glycogen.

2-3% was converted to fat in the liver via de novo lipogenesis.

The rest was oxidized and expelled as CO2.

According to the study authors, this is quite similar to the metabolic fate of glucose. Even if you’re talking about de novo lipogenesis, often considered the sole province of fructose overfeeding, research shows that overfeeding with glucose also provokes the creation of new fat.

As far as burning/oxidizing of ingested glucose and fructose, there are differences. At rest, people tend to burn fructose faster than glucose. During exercise, people tend to oxidize glucose faster than fructose. However, when you give someone both fructose and glucose together, they burn them faster than either fuel source alone. In one study, subjects were either given 100 grams of fructose, glucose, or fructose+glucose. The fructose group burned through 43.8% of their dose, the glucose group burned through 48.1% of theirs, while the fructose+glucose group burned through 73.6% of their dose.

Is the storage capacity for energy from fructose and glucose equivalent (i.e., liver vs muscle glycogen)?

There’s actually a misconception about fructose and glycogen repletion. Here’s the story you may have heard: Fructose can only contribute to liver glycogen, while glucose only contributes to muscle glycogen.

It’s not quite accurate. I believed it for awhile, too, until I actually checked it out. It turns out that both fructose and glucose are able to contribute toward both liver and muscle glycogen. Fructose is about half as efficient as glucose at replenishing muscle glycogen, as it first must be converted into glucose in the liver before being sent out, but it will eventually get the job done.

One big difference is that there’s a lot more room in your muscles than in your liver. The average person can store about 300 grams of glycogen in their muscles but only 90 grams in their liver. Even if the metabolic fates are ultimately pretty similar in a vacuum, in the real world there’s simply less room for liver glycogen, and, thus, less room for fructose in the diet without overstepping the bounds and incurring metabolic dysfunction.

So, if you’re talking about an overweight, sedentary person walking around with full glycogen stores eating a hypercaloric diet, fructose will behave differently than glucose. In the healthy, lean, eucaloric, and active, whole foods-based fructose isn’t a big deal and may not have a drastically different metabolic effect compared to glucose.

At any rate, discussing isolated fructose and isolated glucose may not even be very relevant to real world results. You’re eating fruit, not quaffing cola. You’re enjoying a sweet potato, not a bag of Skittles smothered in agave nectar. You’re eating both glucose and fructose together in the context of a meal, of a whole food. Don’t get too bogged down in the effects of isolated nutrient-poor sugars unless you’re consuming them that way.

To what extent is fructose metabolized in a manner that is more similar to alcohol than carbohydrate?

Fructose is metabolized in the liver. Alcohol is metabolized in the liver.

Fructose gets taken up by the liver without insulin. Alcohol ends up in the liver without insulin rising.

But after that, according to Richard Feinman, the similarities stop. Alcohol is a toxin with known toxic metabolites. There may be some benefit to low level exposure to alcohol, but it remains a toxin. Fructose can be situationally toxic, as in the obese guy with glycogen-replete fatty liver and full-blown diabetes, but we are physiologically capable of handing normal amounts without producing toxic metabolites. Feinman considers it more of a rhetorical device than a statement of facts.

That’s it for today, folks. Thanks for reading and if you have any further questions on the topic, let me know down below and I’ll do my best to get to them.

Take care!

References:

Tappy L, Lê KA. Metabolic effects of fructose and the worldwide increase in obesity. Physiol Rev. 2010;90(1):23-46.

Sun SZ, Empie MW. Fructose metabolism in humans – what isotopic tracer studies tell us. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2012;9(1):89.

Blom PC, Høstmark AT, Vaage O, Kardel KR, Maehlum S. Effect of different post-exercise sugar diets on the rate of muscle glycogen synthesis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1987;19(5):491-6.

Mcdevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74(6):737-46.

Rosset R, Lecoultre V, Egli L, et al. Postexercise repletion of muscle energy stores with fructose or glucose in mixed meals. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017;105(3):609-617.

The post Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup appeared first on Mark's Daily Apple.

[jesseneufeld]

Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup

Last week, Craig Emmerich graced us with a great post on the oxidative priority of various dietary fuel sources, namely fats, carbohydrates, and protein.

If you haven’t had the chance to read through Craig’s post, definitely do. The visuals really drive home the point of fuel priority. Visuals appeal to me. They have a way of sticking with you, and there’s a power in recalling them when you’re making daily choices.

Today, I’m going through and answering some of the questions you folks had in the comment board.

I’m actually answering a great series of questions from Gerard.

I’ve seen this analysis before, and always had the question – can we really lump “carbohydrates” together like this?

No, we can’t. Craig gave a great overview, a useful 30,000 foot view that’s sufficient for most people who just want to eat and metabolize their fuel better, but there are differences between different carbohydrates. I know he’d say as much, and he may have time to weigh in here, too. If his schedule allows, I’ll include his response later today. But back to the differences in carbohydrates…. I’ll save fructose versus glucose for my answers to Gerard’s next questions. What about others?

Think of fiber. Fiber the monolith is already different from more digestible carbohydrates like glucose and fructose in that we can’t extract very much (or even any) caloric energy from it. But you can go even further and look at the individual metabolic fates of the different types of fiber.

Fermentable fibers like inulin and resistant starch are fermented into short chain fatty acids like butyrate and propionate. These provide important cell signaling and are worth about 2 calories per gram, give or take. Others forms of fiber are not fermented and provide colonic bulk but not calories.

Certain carbohydrates are treated differently in different people. Lactose tolerance allows people to digest lactose with lactase and use it for fuel. Lactose intolerance prevents people from digesting lactose, instead diverting it to gut bacteria to ferment and cause terrible digestive distress. FODMAP intolerance is similar. Those with FODMAP intolerance ferment carbs like sugar, lactose, and others in the gut, producing gas but not calories; those without it digest the carbs, producing useable energy.

Are fructose and glucose metabolized differently for this purpose?

There are definitely differences. For one, glucose stimulates insulin production, while fructose does not. But the differences may not be as stark as we often think.

When scientists attached isotopes to fructose, had healthy sedentary people eat it, then tracked the metabolic fate of the fructose molecules, they found:

50% ended up as glucose, converted by the liver to be used elsewhere in the body.

25% ended up as lactate, converted by the liver.

17% ended up as liver glycogen.

2-3% was converted to fat in the liver via de novo lipogenesis.

The rest was oxidized and expelled as CO2.

According to the study authors, this is quite similar to the metabolic fate of glucose. Even if you’re talking about de novo lipogenesis, often considered the sole province of fructose overfeeding, research shows that overfeeding with glucose also provokes the creation of new fat.

As far as burning/oxidizing of ingested glucose and fructose, there are differences. At rest, people tend to burn fructose faster than glucose. During exercise, people tend to oxidize glucose faster than fructose. However, when you give someone both fructose and glucose together, they burn them faster than either fuel source alone. In one study, subjects were either given 100 grams of fructose, glucose, or fructose+glucose. The fructose group burned through 43.8% of their dose, the glucose group burned through 48.1% of theirs, while the fructose+glucose group burned through 73.6% of their dose.

Is the storage capacity for energy from fructose and glucose equivalent (i.e., liver vs muscle glycogen)?

There’s actually a misconception about fructose and glycogen repletion. Here’s the story you may have heard: Fructose can only contribute to liver glycogen, while glucose only contributes to muscle glycogen.

It’s not quite accurate. I believed it for awhile, too, until I actually checked it out. It turns out that both fructose and glucose are able to contribute toward both liver and muscle glycogen. Fructose is about half as efficient as glucose at replenishing muscle glycogen, as it first must be converted into glucose in the liver before being sent out, but it will eventually get the job done.

One big difference is that there’s a lot more room in your muscles than in your liver. The average person can store about 300 grams of glycogen in their muscles but only 90 grams in their liver. Even if the metabolic fates are ultimately pretty similar in a vacuum, in the real world there’s simply less room for liver glycogen, and, thus, less room for fructose in the diet without overstepping the bounds and incurring metabolic dysfunction.

So, if you’re talking about an overweight, sedentary person walking around with full glycogen stores eating a hypercaloric diet, fructose will behave differently than glucose. In the healthy, lean, eucaloric, and active, whole foods-based fructose isn’t a big deal and may not have a drastically different metabolic effect compared to glucose.

At any rate, discussing isolated fructose and isolated glucose may not even be very relevant to real world results. You’re eating fruit, not quaffing cola. You’re enjoying a sweet potato, not a bag of Skittles smothered in agave nectar. You’re eating both glucose and fructose together in the context of a meal, of a whole food. Don’t get too bogged down in the effects of isolated nutrient-poor sugars unless you’re consuming them that way.

To what extent is fructose metabolized in a manner that is more similar to alcohol than carbohydrate?

Fructose is metabolized in the liver. Alcohol is metabolized in the liver.

Fructose gets taken up by the liver without insulin. Alcohol ends up in the liver without insulin rising.

But after that, according to Richard Feinman, the similarities stop. Alcohol is a toxin with known toxic metabolites. There may be some benefit to low level exposure to alcohol, but it remains a toxin. Fructose can be situationally toxic, as in the obese guy with glycogen-replete fatty liver and full-blown diabetes, but we are physiologically capable of handing normal amounts without producing toxic metabolites. Feinman considers it more of a rhetorical device than a statement of facts.

That’s it for today, folks. Thanks for reading and if you have any further questions on the topic, let me know down below and I’ll do my best to get to them.

Take care!

(function($) { $("#dfskJrZ").load("https://www.marksdailyapple.com/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php?action=dfads_ajax_load_ads&groups=674&limit=1&orderby=random&order=ASC&container_id=&container_html=none&container_class=&ad_html=div&ad_class=&callback_function=&return_javascript=0&_block_id=dfskJrZ" ); })( jQuery );

ga('send', { hitType: 'event', eventCategory: 'Ad Impression', eventAction: '66572' });

References:

Tappy L, Lê KA. Metabolic effects of fructose and the worldwide increase in obesity. Physiol Rev. 2010;90(1):23-46.

Sun SZ, Empie MW. Fructose metabolism in humans – what isotopic tracer studies tell us. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2012;9(1):89.

Blom PC, Høstmark AT, Vaage O, Kardel KR, Maehlum S. Effect of different post-exercise sugar diets on the rate of muscle glycogen synthesis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1987;19(5):491-6.

Mcdevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74(6):737-46.

Rosset R, Lecoultre V, Egli L, et al. Postexercise repletion of muscle energy stores with fructose or glucose in mixed meals. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017;105(3):609-617.

The post Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup appeared first on Mark's Daily Apple.

Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup published first on https://drugaddictionsrehab.tumblr.com/

[cynthiamwashington]

Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup

Last week, Craig Emmerich graced us with a great post on the oxidative priority of various dietary fuel sources, namely fats, carbohydrates, and protein.

If you haven’t had the chance to read through Craig’s post, definitely do. The visuals really drive home the point of fuel priority. Visuals appeal to me. They have a way of sticking with you, and there’s a power in recalling them when you’re making daily choices.

Today, I’m going through and answering some of the questions you folks had in the comment board.

I’m actually answering a great series of questions from Gerard.

I’ve seen this analysis before, and always had the question – can we really lump “carbohydrates” together like this?

No, we can’t. Craig gave a great overview, a useful 30,000 foot view that’s sufficient for most people who just want to eat and metabolize their fuel better, but there are differences between different carbohydrates. I know he’d say as much, and he may have time to weigh in here, too. If his schedule allows, I’ll include his response later today. But back to the differences in carbohydrates…. I’ll save fructose versus glucose for my answers to Gerard’s next questions. What about others?

Think of fiber. Fiber the monolith is already different from more digestible carbohydrates like glucose and fructose in that we can’t extract very much (or even any) caloric energy from it. But you can go even further and look at the individual metabolic fates of the different types of fiber.

Fermentable fibers like inulin and resistant starch are fermented into short chain fatty acids like butyrate and propionate. These provide important cell signaling and are worth about 2 calories per gram, give or take. Others forms of fiber are not fermented and provide colonic bulk but not calories.

Certain carbohydrates are treated differently in different people. Lactose tolerance allows people to digest lactose with lactase and use it for fuel. Lactose intolerance prevents people from digesting lactose, instead diverting it to gut bacteria to ferment and cause terrible digestive distress. FODMAP intolerance is similar. Those with FODMAP intolerance ferment carbs like sugar, lactose, and others in the gut, producing gas but not calories; those without it digest the carbs, producing useable energy.

Are fructose and glucose metabolized differently for this purpose?

There are definitely differences. For one, glucose stimulates insulin production, while fructose does not. But the differences may not be as stark as we often think.

When scientists attached isotopes to fructose, had healthy sedentary people eat it, then tracked the metabolic fate of the fructose molecules, they found:

50% ended up as glucose, converted by the liver to be used elsewhere in the body.

25% ended up as lactate, converted by the liver.

17% ended up as liver glycogen.

2-3% was converted to fat in the liver via de novo lipogenesis.

The rest was oxidized and expelled as CO2.

According to the study authors, this is quite similar to the metabolic fate of glucose. Even if you’re talking about de novo lipogenesis, often considered the sole province of fructose overfeeding, research shows that overfeeding with glucose also provokes the creation of new fat.

As far as burning/oxidizing of ingested glucose and fructose, there are differences. At rest, people tend to burn fructose faster than glucose. During exercise, people tend to oxidize glucose faster than fructose. However, when you give someone both fructose and glucose together, they burn them faster than either fuel source alone. In one study, subjects were either given 100 grams of fructose, glucose, or fructose+glucose. The fructose group burned through 43.8% of their dose, the glucose group burned through 48.1% of theirs, while the fructose+glucose group burned through 73.6% of their dose.

Is the storage capacity for energy from fructose and glucose equivalent (i.e., liver vs muscle glycogen)?

There’s actually a misconception about fructose and glycogen repletion. Here’s the story you may have heard: Fructose can only contribute to liver glycogen, while glucose only contributes to muscle glycogen.

It’s not quite accurate. I believed it for awhile, too, until I actually checked it out. It turns out that both fructose and glucose are able to contribute toward both liver and muscle glycogen. Fructose is about half as efficient as glucose at replenishing muscle glycogen, as it first must be converted into glucose in the liver before being sent out, but it will eventually get the job done.

One big difference is that there’s a lot more room in your muscles than in your liver. The average person can store about 300 grams of glycogen in their muscles but only 90 grams in their liver. Even if the metabolic fates are ultimately pretty similar in a vacuum, in the real world there’s simply less room for liver glycogen, and, thus, less room for fructose in the diet without overstepping the bounds and incurring metabolic dysfunction.

So, if you’re talking about an overweight, sedentary person walking around with full glycogen stores eating a hypercaloric diet, fructose will behave differently than glucose. In the healthy, lean, eucaloric, and active, whole foods-based fructose isn’t a big deal and may not have a drastically different metabolic effect compared to glucose.

At any rate, discussing isolated fructose and isolated glucose may not even be very relevant to real world results. You’re eating fruit, not quaffing cola. You’re enjoying a sweet potato, not a bag of Skittles smothered in agave nectar. You’re eating both glucose and fructose together in the context of a meal, of a whole food. Don’t get too bogged down in the effects of isolated nutrient-poor sugars unless you’re consuming them that way.

To what extent is fructose metabolized in a manner that is more similar to alcohol than carbohydrate?

Fructose is metabolized in the liver. Alcohol is metabolized in the liver.

Fructose gets taken up by the liver without insulin. Alcohol ends up in the liver without insulin rising.

But after that, according to Richard Feinman, the similarities stop. Alcohol is a toxin with known toxic metabolites. There may be some benefit to low level exposure to alcohol, but it remains a toxin. Fructose can be situationally toxic, as in the obese guy with glycogen-replete fatty liver and full-blown diabetes, but we are physiologically capable of handing normal amounts without producing toxic metabolites. Feinman considers it more of a rhetorical device than a statement of facts.

That’s it for today, folks. Thanks for reading and if you have any further questions on the topic, let me know down below and I’ll do my best to get to them.

Take care!

(function($) { $("#dflG2zz").load("https://www.marksdailyapple.com/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php?action=dfads_ajax_load_ads&groups=674&limit=1&orderby=random&order=ASC&container_id=&container_html=none&container_class=&ad_html=div&ad_class=&callback_function=&return_javascript=0&_block_id=dflG2zz" ); })( jQuery );

ga('send', { hitType: 'event', eventCategory: 'Ad Impression', eventAction: '72277' });

References:

Tappy L, Lê KA. Metabolic effects of fructose and the worldwide increase in obesity. Physiol Rev. 2010;90(1):23-46.

Sun SZ, Empie MW. Fructose metabolism in humans – what isotopic tracer studies tell us. Nutr Metab (Lond). 2012;9(1):89.

Blom PC, Høstmark AT, Vaage O, Kardel KR, Maehlum S. Effect of different post-exercise sugar diets on the rate of muscle glycogen synthesis. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1987;19(5):491-6.

Mcdevitt RM, Bott SJ, Harding M, Coward WA, Bluck LJ, Prentice AM. De novo lipogenesis during controlled overfeeding with sucrose or glucose in lean and obese women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;74(6):737-46.

Rosset R, Lecoultre V, Egli L, et al. Postexercise repletion of muscle energy stores with fructose or glucose in mixed meals. Am J Clin Nutr. 2017;105(3):609-617.

The post Dear Mark: Oxidative Priority Followup appeared first on Mark's Daily Apple.

Article source here:Marks’s Daily Apple

[harrismithson]

Hilde Maehlum - Concave Face

The trick of perception as it looks as the face is following you and facing outwards when it is in fact carved into the stone.

Location: Ekebergparken is a sculpture park, Oslo

#BA2a #Research2a #Oslo

[vernicle]

What To Do When Suffering A Broken Nose

[ad_1]

What are the most frequent leads to of a broken nose (nasal fracture)?

A broken nose (nasal fracture) generally occurs from an athlete finding hit in the confront by both an opponent or sports products these as hockey sticks, baseballs, or softballs. Fractures can occur both from a direct blow to the front of the nose or from a sideways blow.

Who will get a broken nose (nasal fracture)?

A broken nose (nasal fracture) is frequent in sports where there is direct actual physical get hold of among athletes. A broken nose is frequent in the sports of basketball and soccer from head-to-head get hold of, head-to- elbow get hold of, or head-to- shoulder get hold of.

Any sport in which a small ball is traveling at large speeds is a sport in which a broken nose is frequent. For illustration, consider the sport of softball. Fractures can occur in a quantity of means like fouling off an inside fastball or curveball straight to the nose, taking a grounder off of a lousy hop straight to the nose, or lacking a fly ball with the glove and catching it with the nose.

Indications

What are the signals and indicators of a broken nose?

Most broken noses are heading to immediately outcome in nasal bleeding. The blood can be coming from the two the inside of the nose from the fracture and exterior of the nose from lacerations and/or abrasions incurred through the influence.

One of the very best indicators of a broken nose is the alignment of the nose. Have the athlete look into a mirror as soon immediately after the influence as doable and prior to the swelling placing in. Have the athlete check out the bridge of the nose to see if it seems to be straight.

The nose may perhaps also look flattened or asymmetrical. The nasal airway may perhaps be obstructed building it hard for the athlete to breathe by way of the two nostrils.

As time passes, the tissue close to the nose and below the eyes will start to swell. Discoloration will also start to set in and will boost in coloration through the 48 hrs put up-harm.

 Treatment method

What is the speedy cure for a broken nose?

Care need to to start with be supplied to the athlete to make certain that the athlete did not maintain a significant head harm. Any power that can fracture a bone in the confront can also bring about a concussion or brain harm.

If the athlete is aware and bleeding, the to start with phase is to cease the bleeding. Gauze can be applied to the nose with mild tension. The athlete need to be put in a sitting down posture with their head tilted forward. This will bring about the blood to drain out of the nose and not down the back again of the athlete's throat.

For extra cure details, remember to pay a visit to the pursuing url Broken Nose

Much more Information: Read through about treating sports injuries using the P.R.I.C.E. basic principle - Protection, Rest, Icing, Compression, Elevation.

Really should I have the broken nose reset?

If a broken nose is existing, the athlete may perhaps have his/her nose repositioned if essential by an unexpected emergency area doctor or may perhaps be referred to an ear, nose, and throat professional. To have the fracture repositioned with no surgical restore, this need to be performed both immediately immediately after the harm or 3 to 7 times later when the swelling has minimized.

If sizeable time has handed and the fracture has started to recover (7 times put up-harm), then surgical restore may perhaps be demanded to reset the fracture.

Is it risk-free to return to sports immediately after a broken nose?

Athletes can safely and securely return to sport when they have been cleared by a doctor to return and only if they have on a protective splint or confront guard. These can be obtained by sports medication corporations or can be tailor made designed for the person. The athlete need to have on the confront guard for at least 6 weeks put up-harm or till the doctor states that it is risk-free.

If you suspect that you have a broken nose (nasal fracture), it is significant to search for the urgent consultation of a area sports injuries medical professional for acceptable care. To find a major medical professional or actual physical therapist in your space, remember to pay a visit to our Come across a Sporting activities Drugs Doctor or Actual physical Therapist In the vicinity of You section.

References

Bahr, R., & Maehlum S. (2004). Clinical Guideline to Sporting activities Accidents. Human Kinetics: Champaign, IL.

Anderson, M.K., Hall, S.J., & Martin, M. (2009). Foundations of Athletic Coaching: Avoidance, Evaluation, and Management. (3rd Ed). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA

[ad_2] Supply by Terry Zeigler

from Viral News Around The World - Feed http://ift.tt/2qPWMUj via IFTTT

#IFTTT #Viral News Around The World - Feed