tarmac terror

iTrader: (2)

I have been reading quite a lot recently about natural medicines and remedies, as well as researching for my own information, the details about various vitamins and supplements.

Do any of you take vitamin pills or regular health supplements, do you notice any real benefits from doing so?

Midlife......

iTrader: (2)

No is the short answer.

I have no medical need so just eat a normal (ish) diet and get on with working myself to death so the government can tax the ****e out of me and spend it on others...

Shaun

SiPie

Yes

Have taken St Johns Wort tincture for many many years that has helped me successfully manage depression (until recently anyway)

Also take a male multi vit, omega 3,6 & 9 and an aloe Vera tablet which has proven brilliant for aiding digestion.

Jamz3k

Not sure if it counts but for the past 2 months ive been drinking Berocca as my diet is awful. Works really well for me but i doubt its any good for me.

Turbohot

No.

I took Glucosamine for joints in 2009-2010. I'm not sure if it did anything to me. Saying that, a trainee of mine recently developed a training session on nutrition and health, and supported the role of Omega 3 supplements with a recent study conducted by the Government. This person is a PhD in Biochemistry and a qualified dietician, so was quite reliable with the info. I was quite impressed. Not that I hadn't read about it before, but a scientist supporting something with a robust evidence-based study does make a difference. Its posible that a new study may come out soon; to reduce the efficacy of the old one. We shall see when that happens.

I was taking Kelp, B12, and cod liver oil last year. I have stopped it, but I should really finish the little bottles before they go out of date.

I think people should first ensure what they need as a supplement. Then only they should indulge themselves into the ones they really need. Otherwise, its a waste of money.

mantazini

iTrader: (25)

If you do work out , have a look at OPTIMEN vitamins..

Coffin Dodger

Just to clarify it's the Aloe Vera that has aided your digestion not the multi-vit?

If so would be interested to try as mine isn't the greatest sometimes though I can usually attribute it to bad/rich food, alcohol, stress, or a combo of all three

john banks

It is worth looking at the evidence base when deciding, not basing it on whether people report feeling better (placebo effect or they were going to get better anyway), or whether someone qualified says it is effective (unless they back it up with evidence and even then look at the possibility of bias due to funding).

EddScott

We started with Berocca but as its expensive we've moved to the Tesco own - if you read the contents there isn't that much between them.

Can't say for sure if it really makes any difference but its become a bit of a habit. Berocca, coffee and 2 Weetabix is my daily breakfast.

Leslie

I take C0-Q10 to combat the side effects of taking Statins. It has made a signifant difference.

Les

SiPie

Coffin Dodger

Aloe Vera was incredible, I have tried everything over many years and also just put it down to stress. Worked a treat though and seldom suffer these days.

Good luck

RobJenks

I have suffered migraines since I was 10 . Recently .for no apparent reason ,the frequency of these attacks were occurring every day.
My life was pretty ordinary.
Searched the net and discovered low levels of magnesium could be an issue .
Have been on a supplement of magnesium for a week and so far no attack !
If any sufferers here , give it a try.

jef

iTrader: (13)

its a personal choice, but 1 thing id definatley say is, take the marketing claims with a rather large pinch of salt.

a healthy balanced diet should see adequate nutrition and vitamin/mineral levels ok, although medical conditions can alter things along with an non balanced diet,.

ill repet dont let the hype influence your decision too much, do some balanced research

RobsyUK

iTrader: (2)

My feet click like the clappers in the mornings... I started taking one cod liver oil a day and it stopped... I ran out and the clicking came back.. Started taking them again and it's all good in the hood.

tony de wonderful

I don't take much really just some fish oil and vit B. To be honest I think it is all unnecessary so long as you eat well. I have been taking some saw palmetto too as an experiment. It seems to result in boners you can bash a castle wall down with.

tony de wonderful

I've also got a copper band for arthritis.

jef

iTrader: (13)

typical western diets are haevy in certain nutrients, and at times may require balance for optimum health,

fats are a a great debate as there so so important in a persons diet - with such massive effects, some positive some negative depening on type and volume.

plus over the years the goverments guidlines have changed multiple times, and medias sensationalism affects understanding.

a balanced diet should see the vast majority of basics covered - although its probably not that common for the masses to have a balanced diet - its easily heavy in one part and light in others,
food supplements are over marketed, but it doesnt mean there all useless - you just need to do a bit of reading between the lines

i personally like milk thistle, saw palmetto and flaxseed oil, along with my higher than average protein diet

jef

iTrader: (13)

common ailments like anemia in females can be positively affected by vitamin supplemtation, although usually under a trained professionals guidance.

there are many sides to this coin, and many variables that require consideration

Chip

Si,

In what way did it aid your digestive system? PM me if you like.

Chip

john banks

I can't think which vitamin that is jef, as the most common anaemia by far in females is not positively affected by vitamin supplementation. Professional guidance is something I would agree with for anaemia in particular as it is easy to miss a malignancy. It is also possible to cause spinal cord damage by replacing a vitamin of which the patient is deficient, unless you do it in the right order!

jef

iTrader: (13)

yip agree john, consult your gp initially for medical diagnosis at all times, until they pass you onto a specialist.

background research will not harm you though, as long as you understand the context in which its used and used internet filtration

a half decent article on fats - mostly in laymeans terms, some more sports orientated , but some quite relevant to most people
Essential Fatty Acids

Article by James Collier BSc (Hons) RNutr - Nutrition Consultant
'Fat' is a word which conjures up negative thoughts when we hear it; we tend to mentally associate the word with poor nutrition and we have traditionally been encouraged to cut down of levels of fat in our diet in order to promote good health. Confusingly, more recently some advocators of the low carbohydrate eating regimens have been telling us to eat more fat.





So, who is right? The answer: neither and both! Now you're even more confused, this article will try to unravel the issues which have been made unnecessarily over-complicated!

Bodybuilding nutrition experts often tell us that we need to eat 'good fats' in order to grow muscle. Whilst certain fatty acids are essential in our diet for good health, (as discussed below) the direct effect of consuming these to stimulate muscle growth is debatable. Obviously, as bodybuilders, we desire optimum health to keep well in order to train hard and grow more efficiently, which naturally includes looking after our heart and circulatory system.

And in the real world, I find it hard to believe that bodybuilders who declare on paper a 'perfect' low fat meal plan, in practice actually do stick to their regimen rigidly, and most of us don't really consume a diet rock bottom low in total fat intake. So then, why do we need to add extra fats? Surely we're getting all of these, and won't more fat in our diet prevent us from cutting?

I am going to discuss the use of fats and essential fatty acids from a fitness and bodybuilding angle. However if anyone wishes to read more into fat manipulation and heart health I thoroughly recommend the book The Heart Disease Breakthrough - The 10-Step Program that can save your Life by Yannios (1999).

Types of Fatty Acids
Fat is an essential macronutrient (if you haven't come across the word 'macronutrient' before it refers to the big nutrients: protein, carbohydrate and fat; whereas 'micronutrient' refers to vitamins and minerals). We need fat for a number of healthy body functions, and without it we die. Moreover, some fatty acids are 'essential' due to the fact that vertebrates lack an enzyme involved in their metabolism, or that insufficient amounts of that fatty acid can be synthesized in the body for it to function effectively for good health.

Fatty acids are the simplest unit of fat. There are a large number of fatty acids which differ in respect of their chain length and their structure. Saturated fatty acids (SFAs) are those which have no double bonds in their structure, whereas unsaturated fats have one double bond (monounsaturates) or more than one double bond (polyunsaturates) in their chain. Fatty acids can also differ in structure at the point of the double bond, making them trans fatty acids which in turn makes the whole molecule look and act somewhat like a saturated fatty acid.

SFAs are most commonly found in foods of animal origin such as meat and dairy produce and trans fats are formed from the hydrogenation of fats (for confectionary and some margarines). Both these groups should be kept to a minimum as they can adversely affect blood cholesterol levels.

Monounsaturated fats (MUFAs) are found in high amounts in olive, rapeseed and flaxseed (linseed) oils. Consuming more of these fats as a proportion of our total fat intake may reduce our LDL or 'bad' cholesterol level, whilst keeping HDL or 'good' cholesterol levels high.

Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) are more complicated to explain due to the fact that they are subdivided into three categories depending on where their first double bond appears: omega-3, omega-6 and omega-9 fatty acids (omega may sometimes be abbreviated to ω or Ω). As a general rule increasing levels of PUFAs in our diet as a proportion of total energy intake, has been shown to help reduce the total cholesterol level, however this unfortunately also means the HDL level may be reduced.

Strictly speaking only the fatty acid linoleic acid, an omega-6 fatty acid, is essential as it cannot be synthesised by the body at all (Hunt & Groff 1990). However, some omega-3 PUFAs may also be essential, principally α-linolenic acid (ALA1). However, the omega-3s eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) could be viewed as 'conditionally' essential. Also 'conditionally' essential are arachidonic acid (AA) and γ-linolenic acid (GLA) as they reduce the dietary requirement for linoleic acid.

The essential and 'conditionally' essential fatty acids, their classification and principle dietary sources


Fatty acid Type of PUFA Rich dietary source
Linoleic acid Omega-6 Corn, safflower, sunflower, soyabean, peanut oils
α-linolenic acid (ALA) Omega-3 Flaxseed, soyabean, rapeseed oils
Arachidonic acid (AA) Omega-6 Small amounts in animal fats
γ-linolenic acid (GLA) Omega-6 Corn, safflower, sunflower, soyabean oils
Eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) Omega-3 Oily fish
Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) Omega-3 Oily fish
1Author's note: do not confuse this abbreviation with the popular nutritional supplement alpha-lipoic acid also called ALA!

Essential Fatty Acid Supplementation
One of the most frequently asked supplement questions at the moment is 'Do I need to take essential fatty acid (EFA) supplements?' The answer to this is some of us may benefit from using EFA supplements whereas others may not; it depends on your diet and lifestyle.

The modern Western diet is abundant in omega-6s from vegetable oils used in commercial cooking. Also eating a balanced varied diet means it's very easy to get a sufficient intake of linoleic acid and AA. This has actually lead to a situation where our intakes of omega-6s are too high in respect of our omega-3s. The optimal ratio of omega-6mega-3 is as close to 2:1 as possible, however in the UK diet the figure is more like 6:1 or in some areas as much as 20:1. The benefits of a good intake of omega-3s are well documented and they have been associated in numerous studies with good cardiovascular health, reduction in some cancers, improvement in brain function and possibly enhanced athletic performance. You may be interested to know that some population studies have revealed that areas where the ratio of consumption of omega-6mega-3 is high, cardiovascular disease rates are also high, and in regions where the ratio is nearer to 1:1 the incidence of cardiovascular diseases are significantly lower.

Bodybuilders often consume a lot of oily fish - salmon, mackerel, sardines, pilchards, trout and even tuna - due to their high quality protein content. These fish are also very high in EPA and DHA and so their regular intake is encouraged. However vegetarians obviously do not consume fish, so will need to get their omega-3s from flaxseed oil or from sprinkling ground linseeds on their salads.

Flaxseed oil is a great source of omega-3s and also contains significant amounts of MUFAs. If you are not getting enough of these fatty acids from your food, it may be an idea to supplement your diet with a tablespoon daily. Flaxseed oil is great poured over salads or mixed in fruit juice. However, do not heat flaxseed oil as it is not suitable for cooking with. Rapeseed oil also contains good amounts of omega-3s and is high in MUFAs, and as it can be heated, is a suitable cooking oil, but make sure the rapeseed oil you buy is labelled 'low in erucic acid'. Another good choice of fat to use in cooking is virgin olive oil which is very high in MUFAs.

Cod liver oil supplements have been available for decades but offer little benefit in respect of fatty acid supplementation, as the doses of EFA are quite low. More recently many fish oil supplements have appeared on the market. If you'd prefer to take a capsule than improve your nutrition or incorporate an oil into your diet make sure you choose a good quality fish oil supplement, as some cheaper ones have ineffective low doses of fatty acids and haven't been treated properly in the manufacturing process, becoming rancid and effectively useless.

Optimum oil blends are currently also very trendy concoctions to use as part of a health and fitness supplement stack. These include formulas like Udo's Oil, which is claimed to provide the correct 'ratios' of essential PUFAs. However, as these do not take into account people's individual diets and what EFAs they obtain from their food, which will obviously vary greatly in total fat and fatty acid quantities, I feel it would be preferable to ensure good intake from food and oils, as opposed to formulated blends.

Whilst any keen athlete or bodybuilder should keep their fat intake fairly low, they should be cautious not to consume too little, or they will be limiting themselves of a good source of energy. We also need to ensure we are including good levels of EFAs to ensure efficient metabolic functioning and adequate energy levels for optimal performance.


Key Points:
Cut down the amounts of saturated and trans fats in your diet
Include foods and oils rich in monounsaturated fats
Maintain a moderate intake of omega-6 polyunsaturates
Increase your intake of omega-3 fats by consuming oily fish, flaxseed oil or ground linseeds - you may wish to do this by supplementation
Enjoy your food!

my 2 favs for the past while - eliminating some obvious bias are
Biochemical Individuality

By Paul Eastwood BSc Chek Kinesis - Trainer to the stars and metabolic type nutritionist http://companies.to/metabolictypingassessment
In current day training methodology we employ many forms of assessment when we meet a new client for the first time, as well as periodically throughout their training program. This allows us to record individual differences and variances within the population as a whole due to genetic and environmental influences. A periodical assessment evaluates your client's responses to your training programme and allows you determine what changes are necessary for continued improvement. Thus we treat our clients on an individual level in regards to physical and physiological responses to exercise but never before really on a nutritional basis. This is a poor attitude to the importance and vast benefit available from nutrition and I still see many trainers and magazines lump everybody in the same basket and not appreciate the biochemical individuality that exists between us. I hope this article brings some sense to the fact that we now appreciate the biochemical differences of individuals and monitor them accordingly, both from a nutritional standpoint as well as a physical one. If different people have different physical attributes, it makes sense then that their nutritional requirements and nutritional responses will also be different.





The concept of biochemical individuality is not a new one in fact, at least not in the medical world. The first theory of biochemical individuality was introduced by an English physician, Sir Archibald Garrod in 19081,2 even though his works were not published until the year after. In the past, nutrition has largely been based on what the food properties were and how much that would benefit the population as a whole, rather than on how specific that nutrient was for any given individual. Now with further research since Sir Archibald Garrod's ground breaking work, we now know that even diseases such as phenylketonuria, an autosomal genetic disorder, can be effectively treated. Phenylketonuria is characterized by an enzyme deficiency2 and a diet low in phenylalanine providing adequate amounts of other amino acids is the treatment, especially as there is no cure and damage done is irreversible.3

In even more recent works we see even more effective treatment on health from the power of nutrition from William Wolcott's new book The Metabolic Typing Diet. A conglomerate of health practitioners such as nutritionists, physicians, physiologists and even psychologists collate evidence on how foods are playing a massive role on their specific areas of research. Science from over 30 years ago4 has been assembled and applied to human subjects which is the common denominator of all our work regardless of your area of study; and as we are not all working with the exact same person our guiding principle must be to the individual client and their bodily relationship to food and specific nutrients, not the other way round.

For some time now we have been using physical systems to train and coach the clients and athletes we work with. Over time we have learnt to refine and adapt our training principles to the individual rather than the old bodybuilding approach of 10–12 reps repeated 3 times for the masses – the industry standard some 10 years ago. I am happy to report I do not see too much of this over simplified approach being used on the ever growing health club membership. The works of Paul Chek, Michael Boyle, Gary Gray and Alwyn Cosgrove to name but a few, are raising the level considerably in this field of human physiology.

What is physiology or physiological exactly?

Physiological - Being in accord with or characteristic of the normal functioning of a living organism.5

I have included this to illustrate why we need a specific individual score rather than a general sweeping statement. After reading this quote, who then is normal? Is it you or is it me? Is it again a third person and why them? We could be talking about physical height, organ efficiency, jump height or nutritional requirements the list is endless and any of these parameters mentioned will also differ between individuals, not to mention the countless hundred not quoted here. Every single human parameter can also change over time at any time depending upon the demand incurred from birth to death. Hans Selye describes that individuals not only have different size stress organs, but each person has their own tolerance to stressors (a stressor such as floor prospecting for trainers) and that each person has different stress levels and stress responses; what might very well be a stressful situation for one person, might not be for another individual.6

Everyone has their own unique genetic imprint and individual environment in which they live, they greatly influence the specific foods each and every person requires. Some of these influences can be seen on the table below to illustrate what stressors and unique environments I am talking about. This table also serves to show that the body is in a constant state of flux7 and thus repeat assessments and regular follow ups are essential for best results.



It is good practice to follow up on a client's nutritional recommendations every couple of weeks; this is where a seven day food diary serves as a useful tool. A re-assessment of a client's individual needs can be performed every quarter or less depending upon what new or intensifying stressors exists in their specific environment. Reference to the above table can be helpful if you suspect or detect new stressors entering their life and after a week or two of exposure – retest and measure accordingly. If this is something new to you and difficult to comprehend I suggest looking for nutritional or educational courses from previous mentioned contributors, such as Paul Chek's HLC course, or read books from authors such as Joseph mercola8 as well as William Wolcott and Trish Fahey4 to improve your knowledge and unlock the real power of nutrition.




With this new knowledge of each of us possessing our own unique individual biochemical make up, we now know4

Any food or nutrient that works well for one person may have no effect on a second and may even make a third person worse
Any food or nutrient can have virtually opposite biochemical influences in different people
This is the concept that lies in the heart of metabolic typing
The effects of nutrition are cumulative, the more you ingest the stronger the effect
This last statement is extremely important to understand as foods to avoid for your unique biochemistry are essential knowledge if you are looking to reduce energy dips and body fat. Listed below are several foods that also require caution for regular consumption as they are receiving more and more attention from careful research that they are not beneficial to optimum health and fitness8,9.

Alcohol
Caffeine
Sugar
Grains
Hydrogenised oils (i.e. margarine and vegetable oils)
What we are seeing is a reduction in health and performance can come from a limited intake of essential nutrients as well as consumption of bad foods. When non-essential foods are continually ingested, poor nutrition occurs, as you might be aware, no drug known to man 'cures' you, the drug simply kick starts your healing mechanism, food and correct key nutrients do exactly the same thing.4,8,9 The healthy population of this planet are finally beginning to see that even 'apparently' healthy food, still does not yield the results they want and similarly doctors and practitioners have seen incorrect food choices for your body/metabolic type responsible for reduced recovery in certain diseases.4,8,9 This state of poor nutrition is best described in this diagram below where a declining spiral of events takes place starting with nagging colds or simple ailments to begin with, leading down to chronic disease if the body doesn't receive key nutrients to heal and regenerate properly; see diagram 1.



Nutrition and food choices suddenly become more important when considering this modified flow chart. As you become more and more imbalanced as your bodily functions start to get progressively worse until one system fails completely. As each person suffers with their own specific depletion this would answer why some people can be suffering from more than one ailment at a time and why most current leading health practitioners cannot explain them.

It is easy to forget that what we eat is directed into our blood stream and / or organs and from there, is delivered to every cell in our bodies, approx 3-6 times a day, every day; this accounts to 21 – 42 times a week! The impact of nutrition therefore is massive on our health and performance, in fact for successful function the quality, rate and amount of food4,9 at any given time must be considered. This must bring the use of non-organic products into question as these contain many chemicals not designed for human biochemistry to metabolise or are synthesized in our way our bodies don't recognize which when left unchecked, can also affect the very important processes that run on a daily basis; these are:

Digestion, transport, respiration, synthesis, regulation, growth and reproduction10
Without this knowledge it is very likely that most of you are malnourished in one system or more. This can be detected by energy dips, headaches, cravings, digestive disorders or other nagging ailments as well as excess body fat. Where else are you going to store toxins or excess nutrients not required? What are the symptoms of a hang over? That it's your body (specific organs actually) telling you its reacting to your previous night of alcoholic consumption; it repeats this message every time it happens. This is your own internal doctor talking, your own biochemistry responding to the nutrients or lack of being metabolised at that time. If you feel well and have good energy consistently then it's a sure sign you are eating right for your specific individual needs; if not, adopt some changes. Increase your skill as a trainer, coach or nutritionist and seek out these references as it will bring you and your clients towards the levels of health of fitness that we and they all yearn for.





References:
AE. Garrod. 1909. The Inborn errors of metabolism: 2nd Ed 1923.
GT. Berry. 2008. Nestle Nutr Workshop Ser Pediatr Program. 62:55-75; discussion 75-80.
www.wikipedia.org - Phenylketonuria
William L. Wolcott & Trish Fahey. 2002. The metabolic typing diet: Broadway books
The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 2nd Edition. 2004: Houghton Mifflin
Hans Selye. 1978. The stress of life. revised ed: McGraw Hill Inc
Roger J Williams. 1998 edition. Biochemical individuality. Keats Publishing Inc
Joseph Mercola, et al. 2003. Dr. Mercola's Total Health Program: The Proven Plan to Prevent Disease and Premature Aging, Optimize Weight and Live Longer. Mercola.com
Paul Chek. 2004. How to eat move and Be Healthy. California: C.H.E.K Institute.
Tortora, G. J. 2002. Principles Of Anatomy And Physiology: John Wiley & Sons
Paul Eastwood BSc Chek Kinesis – is a trainer to the stars and metabolic type nutritionist, and can be contacted through http://companies.to/metabolictypingassessment




Read more at: http://articles.muscletalk.co.uk/art...viduality.aspx

and finally

How to Read a Scientific Article

By Les Willis aka Nutrition Consultant & MuscleTalk Moderator Big Les - www.healthyaction.co.uk
January 2010
Scientific articles are referenced everywhere. The message is: say a scientist said it and you must be right. The thing is, if you want to look a little more closely at what the scientist actually said there is not necessarily a lot of help available. Just to make it a little bit harder, if you were to start looking for guidance on 'how to read a scientific paper' you get information aimed at students doing academic assessments. However, if you just want to know what to look for and how to spot the good from the bad, really there is not a lot of help. The purpose of this article is to help the non specialist reader dive into the specialist literature and make sense of it.





If you are following up to see if the study actually backs up the claim being made, either by a supplement company or forum poster, then you can, more often than not, just read the title and abstract. If you are reading to learn more, you need the whole article. In either case you need to be reading critically and asking questions.

When assessing the article, it is very important to remember what it is the article is being used to back up; for example if the article is supposed to tell you that you really want to eat oats for breakfast and the article is Protein Metabolism and Endurance Exercise (Gibala 2007) then you are right to think 'that really isn't going to tell me much about oats or breakfast'. Similarly, if you are a bodybuilder trying to find out how much protein to have, this one is not going to help you much either. Which brings us to the first part of assessing an article:

Look at the title
It seems obvious to start with the title, because it is often assumed that the article and the point it is being used to back up actually go together; don't assume! The simple fact is, there are a number of times that they don't; it is easy to be impressed by Muscle glycogen resynthesis rate in humans after supplementation of drinks containing carbohydrates with low and high molecular masses (Aulin et al 2000), but that title doesn't tell you what the results were; nothing could have happened at all. Other titles promise a lot like Protein co-ingestion stimulates muscle protein synthesis during resistance type exercise (Beelen et al 2008) but, once again, when you look closely, this one too fails to deliver a definitive statement.

The key to reading a title and the whole process is to think critically and ask questions of what you are reading. Let's take that second title: If 'Protein co-ingestion stimulates muscle protein synthesis during resistance type exercise' was quoted to back up the statement that you should have whey and glucose in water after a workout, you could be fooled into thinking that it does indeed support that recommendation. After all the title has the word 'protein', and whey is a protein, it says 'co-ingestion' which means having with something else, so whey with glucose – looking good. It says 'stimulates muscle protein synthesis' which sounds a lot like muscle growth, and it talks about resistance exercise, which we know is what scientists call weights workouts – job done.

Well no, actually, this article does not support having whey in glucose after a workout at all. Look closely: 'during' means that the protein has to have been consumed before the end of the exercise and 'resistance-type' doesn't tell you it was a proper weights workout. In fact, in the hands of a scientist hints that really it wasn't a resistance exercise but something similar to one, so already this article title has fallen down. But, if you look further, 'protein co-ingestion' with what? The title does not tell you that the protein was taken in with carbohydrate. So you can see, even by just the title the paper does not support the statement.

In the world of scientific articles, the title is a really important part of the article. Often the title is all you have got; if you are lucky then you could have the abstract as well.

The abstract
An abstract is a short summary of the article, or more precisely, the abstract is supposed to be a summary of the article. Some abstracts are great; other abstracts are really good at not actually telling you anything at all. If you have the abstract you are off to a great start; if you haven't then don't give up, instead go to www.pubmed.com and search for the title there. Pubmed is a massive database of scientific articles. To be honest, if the article you are looking up is not in Pubmed then it is too old or too obscure to be worth any more effort.

Once you have the abstract it is time to have a closer look and pull it apart to see what is really going on. First question is:

Who is the study on?
This is a fundamental consideration; many studies are not on people: Orally administered Endoxifen is a new therapeutic agent for breast cancer (Ahmad et al 2010) looks like a breakthrough and something to excited about; in reality this is a study on rats. Which is why it can be important to look at the abstract in the first place. Rats are not little humans, we share similarities, but we also have rather big differences especially when it comes to metabolism. If the study is on rats then in reality we are a long way from practical human studies, in fact only a test-tube (or in vitro) study is further away.

If the study is on people, then it is important what people the study was done on; in sports science studies practicalities mean often 'healthy volunteers' are used. Unfortunately a 'healthy volunteer' is not what you need. Over time habitual training has an effect on the body, after all that's why people do it. The thing is when you first undertake training, the effect is largely the same whether it is endurance or resistance, it is only over time that the body develops changes that are specific to the training you do. For example, an endurance trained athlete has more mitochondria along with an altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism, whereas your resistance trained athlete with have a decreased density of mitochondria, and an increased phosphocreatine and glycogen content in their muscle, coupled to a more efficient protein metabolism. And that is just the start of the different changes that occur with regular training.

Once you know who the study was on you need to see:

What the study did
This is important because many studies can have little to do with what athletes actually do when they train. We have seen already that using athletes is important. Similarly it can also be important to have study design that replicates what actually happens. A great example of this is glutamine studies. Under normal conditions the body gets all the glutamine it needs by making it from other amino acids, however, in exceptional circumstances, like severe burns or trauma, the body needs extra to help it cope. You would think that a hard training athlete would benefit from glutamine; thing is, we don't know. And one of the biggest reasons we don't know is, not one study has trained the subjects hard enough for extra glutamine to be needed. It is a bit like saying wet weather tyres don't give extra grip when you have only used them in the dry!

At this point you can often stop; with a bit of background knowledge combined with looking things up, you can very quickly see whether or not the study had a chance of actually finding out what it said it was going to find out. If the study hasn't got a hope, like our glutamine studies, then what you are reading isn't going to back anything up – unless the point being made was that the study didn't show anything.

Some studies do survive this far, the next thing to ask is:

What did they measure?
This is different to what was done to whom. This is asking, when our white coated friends had done their poking, prodding and torturing, what did they measure. For example, Recovery from a cycling time trial is enhanced with carbohydrate-protein supplementation vs. isoenergenic carbohydrate supplementation (Berardi et al 2008) took trained cyclists, put them on a cycling machine and had them exercise for an hour on a simulated time trial. So, we have the right subjects doing a test that simulates what they would really do. The scientists even made sure the subjects had the same breakfast; in fact the study design looks really good, because it could measure recovery from exercise.

The measure of recovery here that the subjects did the time trial again 6 hours after the first one having had either carbohydrates or carbohydrates and protein. What you have to ask is, is the performance of these cyclists a measure of recovery, or does this measure back up the original point? After all, if I just said 'having carbohydrates and protein will you do more squat reps?' then this study doesn't help my case at all.

Titles and Abstracts – putting it together
When you read a title and abstract put the two together. Ask would doing what they did find out what they said they were trying to find out? If you are not convinced that this is going to happen from the title and abstract, then you are unlikely to be convinced by the whole article.

Try this out on: Effects of 28 days of resistance exercise and consuming a commercially available pre-workout supplement, NO-Shotgun®, on body composition, muscle strength and mass, markers of satellite cell activation, and clinical safety markers in males (Shelmadine et al 2009), and ask 'would this supplement help an experienced women competitor pre-contest?'. The answer is: you can't tell, the study is with untrained males.

It's a review article
By this point you may have found out that the study wasn't on anyone and the scientists didn't measure anything because you have a review article. There are two types of review article: your normal review and your systematic review. Systematic reviews are easy to spot; often they are helpful and have 'systematic review' at the top. If they don't, then you will find they have a methodology section that tells you how they found the articles that were reviewed. The aim of a systematic review is to minimise the bias and present an up-to-date authoritative statement of what is being reviewed. For example, the helpfully titled Systematic review of the effect of the co-ingestion of protein with carbohydrate post exercise on recovery in athletes (Willis 2010 unpublished): The title tells you exactly what the rest of the paper is going to be about. You will also notice it is quite focussed in what it talks about; again systematic reviews are more often narrow in focus so that they can be authoritative in their findings.

The other type of review is much more common and you have to be a lot more wary of it. Unlike the systematic review, a review is under no obligation to be unbiased and won't tell you how the papers it reviews were found. It could be that the writer went to their filing cabinet and pulled out what was there.




Going a bit deeper
This is where things can get interesting, and where you can find out a lot without actually reading the paper.

First thing, hit Pubmed and find the article. This can take a couple of goes, but if you have the full title it should be easy to find (some times you have to shorten it a little). If it doesn't show up by title, try searching the author and two of the key words; for example 'Shelmadine', 'effects', 'exercise', would find the above Shelmadine article. This can often do the trick for a particularly stubborn piece of work. If you can't find it, ask the person who quoted it for a copy (more about this in a minute).

If you have found the article in a database, the next step is to get it. Some articles are either open access or free text. If you have an article that is free then there will be a link and you get a nice PDF file to read. However, many articles are not open access or free text; if this is the case, ask the person who gave you the reference for a copy (more about what to do if they can't later).

When you search the paper you may find that the original is not in English; this should raise a suspicious eyebrow. Not because science is only done in English, but if the person referencing hasn't told you it is not in English it is usually because they haven't read the whole article.

When you ask for the original, you should be able to get it. Supplement companies should be more than happy for you to read the whole thing, and if it was posted, the person posting should be able to send you a copy of it. Of course, having read this article, some people may try and play smart and make excuses – still be suspicious that they have only read the abstract.

It is a sad fact that on web forums many people say something, go to Pubmed with a few key terms and then quote a reference from the first page of results in an attempt to look like they are really intelligent and you should believe them. One trick is to do a key word search yourself; for example, if they are talking about protein after exercise you would search 'protein' and 'post exercise'. Often you need to limit to searching just titles or title and abstract. Whatever you do, if their reference comes up first hit and it's not open access or free text – call their bluff and ask for it.

Why ask for papers I can't get for free?
Firstly, because you're interested, and secondly, because an abstract is always the edited highlights of the paper. When you read the full text you can really see what happened; often the abstract doesn't tell you enough to be able to know what you want to know, or sometimes the abstract doesn't tell you important details that really change what the paper actually said. For example, one paper on the effect of protein and carbohydrate post-exercise used wheat protein; who uses wheat protein post-workout in the real world? That nugget is not in the abstract. Another paper claims that it used resistance trained males in its abstract. Turns out that the resistance trained males in the study had not used any supplements, including a protein supplement, in the 12 months prior to the study. Do you know any consistent serious weight trainers like that?

If a person is backing themselves up via only reading the abstract, they are attempting to look like they know more than they do, which is never a good thing. If a company is doing this then look carefully for their horse, six-shooter, spurs, boots and ten gallon hat!

Reading the whole thing – some tips
Firstly, a common criticism of sports science papers is that the number of people in them is really small. In the world of medicine studies can be done with a cohort of thousands of people in multiple centres across the world, truly huge trials. In sports science if you get 30 you have done well, and if muscle biopsies are involved getting 10 can be an achievement. At the end of the day, that is how it is, and to criticise a study for low numbers of participants and say its results don't count is like saying 'I don't listen to people from Texas and you are from Texas', short sighted, a little ignorant and could quite possibly get you shot in the foot.

Secondly, reading the whole of the paper is like reading the title and abstract, only longer. You are asking critical questions. The best thing is don't be intimidated by long words and complicated language; don't worry if the results section reads like a foreign language; and finally, if you don't think the study is any good you don't have to believe it.

Studies in journals are not the final word, they are what one group of people found and thought about what they found. Sure the people doing the paper have qualifications and degrees, and some of these people are Stephen Fry super smart. However, none of those things means they got it right, thought of everything or that you accept what they say without question.

It is all about asking questions
For example, in my study I have taken untrained teenagers, made them do single leg extensions and looked at whether having them eat seaweed for breakfast made a difference to how many reps they could do. In my results I have found that by eating a kilo of seaweed for breakfast my teenagers could do an extra two reps and therefore I have concluded that supplementing the breakfast of elite cyclists with seaweed will help them cycle for longer.

Is this a good study? Is this a credible conclusion? Even if I am right, would anyone really eat a kilo of seaweed? I may have written lots about how important performance is, have a results section that proves it is a significant result using every test in my PC statistics software package, and I may even use some very long words, but what I did was daft and my conclusions are 'poop'. And the same follows for any real studies you read; if it all adds up to nothing much, then you don't have to listen to it. Ask questions and be open for answers, because you never know you could learn something too.

When reading a paper, be it the title and abstract or the whole thing, don't be afraid of thinking and concluding that the study is 'poop', because some studies really are that bad. And don't be afraid of asking for more information, especially if it is a forum post, make the poster explain the paper, ask them the question. If the person is really trying to be helpful, and not indulging in an online 'I can wee higher than you contest', then they will be able to do this for you.

I hope you feel more confident about taking on the more specialist literature; most of it looks more complicated than it really is. Sure there are papers like Distinct anabolic signalling responses to amino acids in C2C12 skeletal muscle cells (Atherton et al 2009), which truth be told, you really don't need to be reading; and quite possibly mentioning it out loud could be considered a social no-no! But there are also papers like Cereal and non-fat milk support muscle recovery following exercise (Kammer et al 2009), which are very friendly and are certainly worth a little read.


Read more at: http://articles.muscletalk.co.uk/art...ic-papers.aspx

remove the sports aspect and much info has good information, but be selctive and dont use as guidance just a tool to further exapnd understanding

supplementation is a massive industry and growing, a lot of bullsh*t is claimed

oldsplice

I don't take any supplements. I eat properly.

jef

iTrader: (13)

john why just quote me? out of over ten other non factual based comments?

read the word "can" its a common disclaimer in the same way "possible" is used - when were we talking about malignancy or spinal cord damage if you dont mind?

its as if you have some kind of motive to disprove/discredit me???

tarmac terror

iTrader: (2)

Cheers for the responses folks - I am fed up with repeated visits to my GP for what he thinks may be a stomach or duodenal ulcer. When I go to my GP it is a lottery as to which Dr deals with you - so far I have been to see 3 doctors at my practice.

I have had the usual treatments - blood test to confirm H. Pylori infection and two prescriptions of triple therapy antibiotics to eradicate it; This should have been followed up with a urea breath test but this was not done as the triple therapy is allegedly 95% successful; I was proscribed proton pump ihibitors for three months to reduce levels of stomach acid, and when an endoscopy test was requested the hospital refused, choosing to test instead to do a blood test for celiac's disease which came back negative.

This all started in 2009 just as I shook off swine flu, symptoms went away for almost a year, then returned, and has been a source of annoyance sporadically over the past year or so. I have requested another referral for an endoscopy to try and find out what is going on.

I have been reading about aloe vera and something called Mastic Gum being used to treat digestive disorders, my helpful GP told me he could not advise on alternative medicines. So I find myself at a bit of a crossroads, do I take things down the private route to try and get some answers or solutions, or do I try and improve things myself by trying the 'natural' medicines route?? What I am not sure about, is whether the natural medicines offer anything in terms of a cure, or do they merely ease the symptoms.

I should point out, my diet is reasonably healthy everything I eat is freshly cooked by my wonderful wife, I drink very little and very rarely (less than 5 units a month), I don't smoke, I am 5ft 11 tall and weigh 13 stone. I would not say I was physically fit, but I considered myself to be in good health until this took hold - prior to having contracted swine flu I had not been to a GP in 15 years.

john banks

jef, the other posters quoted personal experience, except post #6 for which we might benefit from some more information and your post #18 which contains advice which is in my professional judgement incorrect and potentially harmful for the reasons I stated which is why I replied specifically to it. Women of child bearing age should consider teratogenicity from vitamin A, and since the most common reason for anaemia in women is menstruation, then this makes them of child bearing age. Additionally, women attempting to self treat iron deficiency or frank anaemia with too small doses of iron not given on prescription often fail as they don't adequately replace menstrual losses. When you give advice in a quasi-medical fashion, you may be best to consider your responsibilities in doing so especially when you talk about things you don't understand. We might think that people are not stupid enough to follow advice from an internet forum, but they do and when you throw scientific stuff around people will trust your advice.

As a professional I thought it reaonsable to give my advice in post #8.

tarmac terror, forum diagnosis is not recommended, but if you look at the quick reference quide and the section (chapter 5) on functional dyspepsia (from the information you have given it may be that this is the diagnosis they are giving you?) you will see the rationale for not performing endoscopy in under 55s with no "alarm symptoms" and following a "test and treat" pathway (for Helicobacter Pylori). You will see the discussion about repeated endoscopies and the low pickup rates for pathology. However, this can leave you frustrated, but consider the treatments listed in chapter 5. The alternatives methods you mention do not have a scientific basis to recommend them.

Link: http://www.sign.ac.uk/guidelines/fulltext/68/index.html

Lee247

So do I, but I still take a multi vitamin with minerals every day. Force of habit

prodriverules

iTrader: (52)

Never taken a supplement in my life and I feel great and work more hours a week than the average person

Frosticles

iTrader: (1)

I take an A to Z multi vitamin every day. Also a high dosage vitamin C because I have a dreadful diet. The multi vitamin does make my farts stink though. Lol

john banks

http://www.quackwatch.com/01Quackery...spotquack.html

SiPie

Jef

Could you not have just posted a link rather than the whole of war and peace