crescere "puliti"

[MISTER X]

Originally posted by multipower


Se mi dai dei motivi validi per cambiare idea forse.... [:---)]


Ciao!!

per raggiungere un determinato surplus calorico bisogna ingerire troppe pro per esempio,visto che i carbo sono cmq limitati.

ecco un motivo.

[gigisik]

........e poi i reni vanno a farsi fottere!!!.... e pure di brutto!!!

[multipower]

Originally posted by gigisik
........e poi i reni vanno a farsi fottere!!!.... e pure di brutto!!!

Trovami un riferimento bibliografico che su persone sane 3gr di proteine per kg corporeo, ad esempio, possano recare danni renali..


Ciao

[multipower]

Originally posted by MISTER X
per raggiungere un determinato surplus calorico bisogna ingerire troppe pro per esempio,visto che i carbo sono cmq limitati.

ecco un motivo.

Abbiamo sempre parlato di *leggero* surplus calorico in massa; ci sono ragazzini epilettici negli USA che seguono una dieta chetogenica per anni con rapporto grassi/carbo 4:1 con assunzione idrica limitata per favorire una chetosi più marcata... e danni a livello di salute.. NESSUNO!

Qualche studio interessante riguardo ai tumori e le diete chetogeniche:


Effects of a ketogenic diet on tumor metabolism and nutritional status in pediatric oncology patients: two case reports.

Nebeling LC, Miraldi F, Shurin SB, Lerner E.

Nutrition Department, Case Western Reserve University, School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

OBJECTIVE: Establish dietary-induced ketosis in pediatric oncology patients to determine if a ketogenic state would decrease glucose availability to certain tumors, thereby potentially impairing tumor metabolism without adversely affecting the patient's overall nutritional status. DESIGN: Case report. SETTING: University Hospitals of Cleveland. SUBJECTS: Two female pediatric patients with advanced stage malignant Astrocytoma tumors. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were followed as outpatients for 8 weeks. Ketosis was maintained by consuming a 60% medium chain triglyceride oil-based diet. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Tumor glucose metabolism was assessed by Positron Emission Tomography (PET), comparing [Fluorine-18] 2-deoxy-2-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) uptake at the tumor site before and following the trial period. RESULTS: Within 7 days of initiating the ketogenic diet, blood glucose levels declined to low-normal levels and blood ketones were elevated twenty to thirty fold. Results of PET scans indicated a 21.8% average decrease in glucose uptake at the tumor site in both subjects. One patient exhibited significant clinical improvements in mood and new skill development during the study. She continued the ketogenic diet for an additional twelve months, remaining free of disease progression. CONCLUSION: While this diet does not replace conventional antineoplastic treatments, these preliminary results suggest a potential for clinical application which merits further research.

PMID: 7790697 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cancer Causes Control 1995 Mar;6(2):164-79 Related Articles, Links

Insulin and colon cancer.

Giovannucci E.
Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School,
Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Some factors related to Westernization or industrialization increase
risk of colon cancer. It is believed widely that this increase in risk
is related to the direct effects of dietary fat and fiber in the
colonic lumen. However, the fat and fiber hypotheses, at least as
originally formulated, do not explain adequately many emerging
findings from recent epidemiologic studies. An alternative hypothesis,
that hyperinsulinemia promotes colon carcinogenesis, is presented
here. Insulin is an important growth factor of colonic epithelial
cells and is a mitogen of tumor cell growth in vitro. Epidemiologic
evidence supporting the insulin/colon-cancer hypothesis is largely
indirect and based on the similarity of factors which produce elevated
insulin levels with those related to colon cancer risk. Specifically,
obesity--particularly central obesity, physical inactivity, and
possibly a low dietary polyunsaturated fat to saturated fat ratio--are
major determinants of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia, and
appear related to colon cancer risk. Moreover, a diet high in refined
carbohydrates and low in water-soluble fiber, which is associated with
an increased risk of colon cancer, causes rapid intestinal absorption
of glucose into the blood leading to postprandial hyperinsulinemia.
The combination of insulin resistance and high glycemic load produces
particularly high insulin levels. Thus, hyperinsulinemia may explain
why obesity, physical inactivity, and a diet low in fruits and
vegetables and high in red meat and extensively processed foods, all
common in the West, increase colon cancer risk.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Insulin, insulin-like growth factors and colon cancer: a review of the evidence.

Giovannucci E.

Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School
and Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
giovannucci@channing.harvard.edu

Insulin and insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axes are major
determinants of proliferation and apoptosis and thus may influence
carcinogenesis. In various animal models, modulation of insulin and
IGF-1 levels through various means, including direct infusion, energy
excess or restriction, genetically induced obesity, dietary quality
including fatty acid and sucrose content, inhibition of normal insulin
secretion and pharmacologic inhibition of IGF-1, influences colonic
carcinogenesis. Human evidence also associates high levels of insulin
and IGF-1 with increased risk of colon cancer. Clinical conditions
associated with high levels of insulin (noninsulin-dependent diabetes
mellitus and hypertriglyceridemia) and IGF-1 (acromegaly) are related
to increased risk of colon cancer, and increased circulating
concentrations of insulin and IGF-1 are related to a higher risk of
colonic neoplasia. Determinants and markers of hyperinsulinemia
(physical inactivity, high body mass index, central adiposity) and
high IGF-1 levels (tall stature) are also related to higher risk. Many
studies indicate that dietary patterns that stimulate insulin
resistance or secretion, including high consumption of sucrose,
various sources of starch, a high glycemic index and high saturated
fatty acid intake, are associated with a higher risk of colon cancer.
Although additional environmental and genetic factors affect colon
cancer, the incidence of this malignancy was invariably low before the
technological advances that rendered sedentary lifestyles and obesity
common, and increased availability of highly processed carbohydrates
and saturated fatty acids. Efforts to counter these patterns are
likely to have the most potential to reduce colon cancer incidence, as
well as cardiovascular disease and diabetes mellitus.


Adv Exp Med Biol 1999;472:51-5 Related Articles, Links


Energy sources and risk of cancer of the breast and colon-rectum in Italy.

Favero A, Parpinel M, Montella M.
Epidemiology Unit, Aviano Cancer Center, Italy.

Dietary habits are thought to be involved as determinant of breast and
colorectal cancer. Nevertheless results of epidemiological studies on
diet show several inconsistencies. This is true for the findings
related to energy and its sources. Between 1991 and 1996, 2569 women
with incident breast cancer (median age: 55 years) and 2588 controls
(median age: 56 years), and 1953 subjects with cancer of the
colon-rectum (median age: 62 years) and 4154 controls (median age: 58
years) were interviewed in the hospitals of six Italian areas. The
validated food frequency questionnaire included questions on 78 foods
and recipes and specific questions on individual fat intake pattern.
Significant risks for breast and colorectal cancer emerged with
increasing intake of energy (odds ratios in highest vs. lowest
quintile were 1.32 and 1.49 respectively). Due to the high
interrelations existing among the various sources of energy, the
separated analysis of each macronutrient didn't achieve the
independent estimates of the effects. In order to overcome this
situation, we used a completely partitioned model in which all the
main sources of energy were entered simultaneously as continuous
variables in the regression. High intake of starch led to an increase
of cancer risk (odds ratios for an addition of 100 kcal/day were 1.08
and 1.10 for breast and colorectal cancer respectively). A positive
association was also found for saturated fat (odds ratios 1.16 for
breast and 1.12 for colorectal cancer). High intakes of
polyunsaturated fatty acids (chiefly derived from olive and seed oils)
were protective more markedly for breast cancer. A possible
interpretation of the risk for starch, implies the glycemic overload
and hyperinsulinemia due to the high grade of refinement of cereals
(the main source of starch) eaten in Italy.


La dieta Metabolica di per se' non è affatto dannosa, sta al nostro buon senso assumere cibi sani in quantità adeguate e farci regolarmente un check up sul nostro stato di salute.


Ciao!!

[lo zar]

Aspettate, aspettate fratellini stiamo facendo un pò di confusione...

Allora prima di iniziare un bravo al Multi che se lo merita (ottimi studi, li ho anch'io nella mia dispensa )......poi dico:
nn sono tanto d'accordo mmmmm... con Multi, quando afferma che "su persone sane 3g di pro nn arrechino nessun effetto".....

Ti sei fatto prender un pò dall'euforia .....Te lo dice un amante delle pro (che spesso qui sul forum ha "combattuto" con coloro che affermavano il contrario....per cui),ma a lungo andare i danni potrebbero (condizionale??? )emergere.....

NN è un'accusa, ne tantomeno (ci mancherebbe!!) un atto di superiorità, ma prova a leggerti (sicuramente già l'avrai fatto) un bel libro di biochimica al capitolo "DIGESTIONE E ASSORBIMENTO DEGLI AMINOACIDI": vedrai che le scorie prodotte da questa metabolizzazione, nn saranno cosi salutari come qualcuno può pensare (io all'inizio ad esempio!)......Scorie azotate, urea, prodotti appunti di rifiuto derivanti dalle stesse pro....IN ECCESSO (e sottolineo!)....mettono i reni e il fegato sotto torchio + di quanto ne svolge normalmente....
E pensa, a lungo andare nn credo sia tutto rosa e fiori.......
Qui ricadiamo sempre su un fatto che mi sta a cuore, ma che trovo qualcosa di veramente intelligente: la CICLIZZAZIONE......(se vogliamo anche delle stesse pro).......

Va bè poi nn parliamo dei grassi, della loro lunga via, e delle "fatiche" che fanno compiere al nostro fegato: pesante davvero, nonostante questi abbiano sempre avuto
UN RUOLO FONDAMENTALE NEL NOSTRO ORGANISMO ....
(anche qui sfogliando un libro di biochimica scoprirai delle cose interessanti ).......

La strada + tranquilla e meno "dissestata" alla fine la fanno i buoni/cattivi GLUCIDi........(nn voglio dilungarmi + di tanto qui)...

Infine butto una frase sulla Metabolica durante la massa:
1) mancanza di insulina (o meglio secrezione nn adatta ad una anbolismo vero e proprio).......rimediare si potrebbe scegliendo di assumere carbo in momenti opportuni, ma il risultato nn sarà mai un anabolismo "continuo"......e A MIO AVVISO nn è la miglior cosa durante la massa.......
2) assenza di carbo: ho detto + volte che la mancanza o la "pochezza" (si può dire??) di questi blocca un circolo fondamnetale per l'ossidazione dei grassi (ciclo di Krebs) per a mancanza del piruvato, e quindi in un secondo momento del ac.ossalacetato....: ciò implica poca produzione di ATP, ovvero la moneta energetica di una cellula.........


JM2C

[multipower]

Interessantissime le tue considerazioni Zar, ad ogni modo volevo sottolineare che il quantitativo proteico di cui stavamo parlando non è consigliabile a persone che svolgo un'attività sedentaria o poco più.

A questo proposito posto un altro studio che dimostra quello che ho appena detto:

Do regular high protein diets have potential health risks on kidney
function in athletes?

Poortmans JR, Dellalieux O

Department of Physiological Chemistry, Institute of Physical Education and Kinesiotherapy, Free University of Brussels, Belgium.

Excess protein and amino acid intake have been recognized as hazardous potential implications for kidney function, leading to progressive impairment of this organ. It has been suggested in the literature, without clear evidence, that high protein intake by athletes has no harmful consequences on renal function. This study investigated body-builders (BB) and other well-trained athletes (OA) with high and medium protein intake, respectively, in order to shed light on this issue. The athletes underwent a 7-day nutrition record analysis as well as blood sample and urine collection to determine the potential renal consequences of a high protein intake. The data revealed that despite higher plasma concentration of uric acid and calcium, Group BB had renal clearances of creatinine, urea, and albumin that were within the normal range. The nitrogen balance for both groups became positive when daily protein intake exceeded 1.26 g.kg but there were no correlations between protein intake and creatinine clearance, albumin excretion rate, and calcium excretion rate.

To conclude, it appears that protein intake under 2.8 g.kg does not impair renal function in well-trained athletes as indicated by the measures of renal function used in this study.

Ciao!

[gigisik]

Completamente d'accordo con te,e tu puoi anche non crederci ma hai pronunziato le stesse parole del mio medico,che vi assicuro e' molto preparato in materia.
Per rispondere a multi,volevo solo precisare che i danni si possono far sentire nel tempo se chiaramento un surplus proteico viene pratico sistematicamente e per lunghissimi periodi;molto poi a mio avviso dipende dalla qualita' proteica dei cibi che sapete meglio di me essere ben diversa fra un merluzzo e un ....MAIALE!!
P.S.Dicutere con voi e' sempre un piacere.........e un arrichimento personale.
GRAZIE

[Punk84]

mi avete fatto sogere dei dubbi...da quando ho 10 anni ora che ci penso ho sempre mangiato dai 3 ai 4 gr di pro per kg di peso corporeo....cioè ad esempio io ho sempre mangiato dai 2 ai 3 etti di carne alla volta, per 3 volte al giorno...

spero, non mi accada nulla baby

[MISTER X]

pienamente concorde con lo ZAR.

Multi lui ti ha spiegato in modo + che esauriente,quello che penso io.

non sono contro le diete metabolica e co. anzi,io stesso l'ho fatto,ma in massa non è per me adatta.

e i motivi inutile ripeterli perchè sono sopra.

[lo zar]

Originally posted by multipower
To conclude, it appears that protein intake under 2.8 g.kg does not impair renal function in well-trained athletes as indicated by the measures of renal function used in this study.

Ciao!

Ripeto, questa conclusione è ciò che penso (e cerco di far pensare ) anch'io........solamente che il pericolo è NEL LENGO TEMPO......
Ecco tutto......

Variare, variare e variare.....qui sta IMO il punto...

[gigisik]

..........CHE SAGGIO!!!!!!!!!